#foswiki 2015-06-06,Sat

↑back Search ←Prev date Next date→ Show only urls(Click on time to select a line by its url)

WhoWhatWhen
gac410And TinyMCE is build and installed on my 1.1.9 system. And strangeness ensues.
1) It needed JQueryPlugin 6.x .. okay easy enough. And it's running, but with some really strange corruption.
There are some *Your line is bold..* lines. A few of them change to *?Your line is bold* when changing from wysiwyg to wikitext.
Only when the line is bold, and starts with the letter Y
Not repeatable on trunk.
[00:00]
jomowithou any utf8? [00:02]
gac410Right
The POST from TinyMCE has hex in it.
[00:02]
jomolike the ">Y" has some meaning.. e.g. <b>Y [00:04]
gac410<p><b>&#8203;Your topics are clean
So for whatever reason, the TMCE editor has inserted &#8203; into the line.
[00:04]
jomohttp://stackoverflow.com/questions/18478847/why-is-8203-being-injected-into-my-html
jomo not really understand it..
[00:05]
gac410Seems to be being inserted by TMCE .. I'm not sure. It's in the HTML if I view the editor source
I'm vaguely recalling that this is caused by bad js compression ...
I think I ran into it once before.
[00:08]
jomohttp://irclogs.foswiki.org/bin/irclogger_log/foswiki?date=2012-06-02,Sat [00:13]
gac410yeah. no idea. I'm running the compressed version on trunk and it's working okay. [00:18]
jomozero width space - maybe tinymce into constructions like <b></b> adds the ZWSP [00:19]
gac410I could hack wysiwygPlugin to remove it. But I think that's the wrong answer. [00:19]
jomono other differences?
or - idea - could be caused with some strange utf8 -> iso1 or utf8 -> JSunicode conversion...
[00:20]
gac410Not that I can see. But not sure. No, It's definitely inserted by tinymce.
I look at the html sent to tinymce its <strong>Your ...</strong> Then when I trace with firebug, and click the wikitext button, the POST contains <b>&8209;Your...</b>
But it's definitely some context in the topic. I created a simple oneline and it doesn'thappen.
[00:22]
jomoomg - that will be complicated to find.. [00:25]
gac410gac410 hates to touch TinyMCE. I constantly discover wormholes to oblivion
well, to make sure it's not the build or compress tools on my new system. I'll build a full beta2 and try it on a clean install.
[00:26]
jomonothing wong happens on the 1.2 the <strong>your</strong> shown as bold in tinymce and converting back to wikieditor it shown as *Your*... [00:30]
is somewhat long the line with the <strong>Your... ?
try short it... to check the error occurence... - maybe the tmce uses the ZWSP for line break or something such..
[00:35]
gac410If you look at foswiki.org/Support/Utf8MigrationConsiderations
It's the one block at http://foswiki.org/Support/Utf8MigrationConsiderations#Quick_Summary
Through the help div ... Be absolutely certain
The Any liine starting with Your is corrupted.
bullet or not
[00:37]
jomohm [00:39]
gac410well good news. beta2 build fine with compression. Wysiwyg seems to be working fine. So this is an issue with 1.2 extension on 1.1.9 [00:43]
jomoso, the extension is not bacward compatible [00:44]
gac410well. or something else is going on. [00:44]
jomooh shit [00:45]
gac410yeah? [00:45]
jomoon the 1.2 i got a topic full of
U+200B
the exact problem
[00:45]
gac410how? [00:45]
jomosame
just copied the text to the tinymce and saved
and watching to the raw file with less
[00:46]
gac410on t.f.o or a local install [00:46]
jomolocal [00:46]
gac410Usually I c/p into the text editor, not tmce. [00:47]
jomof1451010e11a751143c11860c3839a3c8df8a436
i copyed the wikitext into natedit - switched to tinymce, changed one line (just pressed enter) and saved...
[00:47]
gac410f1451010 is a bit old, but who knows. Bigger question is can you recreate it on trunk.foswiki.org Sandbox [00:49]
jomo;-( false alarm
the text already contained the characters when i copyed them from the FO
just checked...
[00:50]
gac410How were you viewing on f.o [00:51]
jomoraw=on
wiki-text view
select -> copy to clipboard..
http://foswiki.org/Support/Utf8MigrationConsiderations?raw=on
[00:51]
gac410yeah that;s what I used try raw=all might be cleaner. [00:52]
jomosame = raw=all copy, pase into my local vim - and the 200b chars are here goind remove them and try it locally [00:54]
gac410You are absolutely right. ... damn.
It's corrupted files on foswiki.org.
[00:55]
jomowhen removed the 200b chars, everyting is ok, saved the text with tmce and nothing appears [00:57]
gac410CharsetConverter corrupted the topics. [00:57]
jomooh shit... [00:57]
gac410*\xe2\x80\x8bYou are on 1.1.x, and intend to remain there:*
No.. no it can't be. I entered them in earlier today.
I did enter them with TinyMCE iirc jeeze I don't really remember now. :(
[00:57]
jomo\xe2\x80\x8b = zero width space - it the U+200B
perl -CSDA -nlE 'say if /\N{U+200B}/' files... finds all such topic
[01:00]
gac410And I have no idea if it happened on 1.1.9 or 1.2.0. I edited in both places ... erm, no. I edited on 1.1.9, noted corrupted verbatim. Reverted, then edited on 1.2.0.
But I might have viewed and c/p that block from 1.1.9 to avoid re-typing all of it.
[01:02]
jomoon the 1.2 (with the clean text) nothing wrong happens [01:02]
gac410So it was probablly my c/p from 1.1.9 [01:03]
jomothe rev=6 contains the 200b too [01:06]
gac410r6 was edited by crawford. [01:07]
jomorev7
sry
[01:07]
gac410okay R7 had the corrupted verbatim blocks. [01:08]
jomothe revison with the corrupted verbatims [01:08]
gac410so I reverted R6 -> R8
Then edited R8 on trunk but didn't think to force a new revision
So if R6 doesn't have them but R7 and R8 do, I *might* have displayed R7 and cut/pasted just that one block of Quick summary
[01:08]
jomothe r6 doesn't have quick summary [01:10]
gac410Right. That is what I was adding when I noticed the corrupted verbatim.
So when I reverted R7, that created R8 == R6. But then I displayed rev=7, and edited and pasted in the block
[01:11]
jomoaahh
understand
[01:11]
gac410updating r8 with data copied from the broken r7,
Okay. So I think the root cause is TinyMCE on 1.1.9, and utf8 core
er utf8 charset not core :D
[01:12]
jomoyes - so, the 1.1.9 corrupted the verbatims (and also added the U+200B) [01:12]
gac410and since the U+200B were invisible, I didn't realize I was pasting in garbage. [01:13]
jomoexactly ;) [01:13]
gac410Thank you so much for helping get to the bottom. [01:13]
jomoi hope - we make a the right resolution :) [01:13]
gac410So I think we need to consider releasing the 1.2.0 extensions BEFORE we release 1.2.0. (Completely opposite of what we normally do).
So sites can safely convert to utf8 on 1.1.9
[01:14]
jomohm... but need test extensions...
or mean core extensions?
[01:15]
gac410basically build and release the 1.2.0 extensions to the Extensions web, so that 1.1.9 can upgrade them first.
Normally our build process, is build the release and then upload each extension afterwards.
[01:16]
jomonot too complicated for users? 1.) on 119 upgrade all extensions 2.) CharsetConvert 3.) upgrade FW to 12? or this is the only way? [01:18]
gac410Okay. CharsetConverter is ONLY needed if you want to run 1.1.9 with utf8, or have a "corrupted" store with mixed character sets and need the "repair" feature of Encode::Detect
If you just want to migrate a clean store, just use bulk_copy.pl Store1 = iso-8859-*, RCS, Store2 = utf8, plainfile
we had a bunch of topics with utf8 embedded, so we needed the smarts of CharsetConverter
[01:19]
jomoyeah - users probably has uniform topic encoding
e.g. SIteCharset
[01:21]
gac410bulk_copy is much safer. It does not modify the source. [01:21]
jomoi hope here isn't much users with mixed charsets... - or we get in a #foswiki many compliants... [01:23]
gac410So safest: Site sets {Store}{Encoding} to == old {Site}{CharSet} and does nothing. It works. (f.o & t.f.o ran that way)
*Best* Site takes default, and runs bulk_copy to copy their old RCS SiteCharset to PlainFile utf8
[01:23]
jomoi not tested but here was some issues in the TFO because the Store was iso1 - isnt? [01:24]
gac410t.f.o and f.o were iso-8859-1 ... with topics containing manual c/p of all sorts of other encodings. [01:25]
jomoyes - that could (i hope) works - i never tried any copy - i just copyied the txt files and discarded the old rcs ones..
and my txt was utf8..
[01:25]
gac410I have not tested bulk_copy either. I will do that when we install beta2 on f.o
So I think a good sequence. 1) Release Beta 2. 2) Install all 1.2.0 extensions on f.o 1.1.9 (verify backwards compat) 3) Install Beta2 into new dir on f.o, 4) install our non-default extns and test ( verify fwd compat), Use bulk_copy to convert store to Plainfile.
[01:26]
jomoi'm sleeing - 3:30 here - gtg ... cul tomorrow :) [01:29]
gac410g'night sleep well. [01:29]
jomo:) [01:29]
............ (idle for 59mn)
GithubBot[distro] gac410 pushed 1 new commit to master: http://git.io/vIOdj
distro/master 05c25c6 George Clark: Item13315: Try both -V and --version for rcs...
[02:28]
***GithubBot has left [02:28]
.... (idle for 19mn)
GithubBot[distro] gac410 pushed 1 new commit to master: http://git.io/vIONV
distro/master 343289c George Clark: Item13378: Messages should reference bulk_copy.pl
[02:47]
***GithubBot has left [02:47]
.............. (idle for 1h9mn)
GithubBot[distro] gac410 pushed 1 new commit to master: http://git.io/vI3T1
distro/master 6962710 George Clark: Item9693: Try to incorporate bulk_copy...
[03:56]
***GithubBot has left [03:56]
............................................ (idle for 3h38mn)
Rich_MorinI'd like to reduce the font size and leading in my verbatims - suggestions? [07:34]
***Rich_Morin has left [07:39]
............................................................ (idle for 4h59mn)
ChanServ sets mode: +o Lynnwood [12:38]
......... (idle for 42mn)
ChanServ sets mode: +o gac410 [13:20]
................... (idle for 1h32mn)
foswiki_irc8exit [14:52]
foswiki_irc2Hello all. I have a question regarding the DateTimePlugin.
Is it still working?
We installed it and it doesn't seem to work.
[14:58]
gac410I have not tried that plugin, I'm not sure
what do you mean by "it doesn't work"
[15:01]
jomoi never used it, but standard questions: do you enabled the plugin after the install? what's mean "not work"? It doesn't expands? what do you have in the logs? ;) [15:02]
gac410foswiki_irc2: hello? Can you give us a bit more to go on? Are you getting errors in the System.InstalledPlugins page? What version of Foswiki are you running? [15:07]
foswiki_irc2Yes.
No errors on installation.
Just it flat out doesn't function when we type out %DATETIME%
http://foswiki.org/Extensions/DateTimePlugin
[15:10]
jomojust installed it - and works... [15:10]
foswiki_irc2If you scroll to the "Examples" section. It's not working there either. [15:11]
gac410Do you get %DATETIME% displayed in the topic? [15:11]
foswiki_irc2yes [15:11]
gac410Okay, So that says that either the extension isn't enabled, or there is an error reported in System.InstalledPlugins
It won't work in the Extension web. It's not installed on foswiki.org
the %DATETIME% macro is a "registered" tag, so even if the plugin returned nothing, it would be removed from the rendered topic if it was active.
[15:11]
foswiki_irc2Okay, I found this . . .
DateTimePlugin: (disabled) Error encountered loading the plugin. See errors below.
[15:14]
gac410Okay. Please paste the errors to http://pastebin.com
Unless it's an obvious one-liner ... usually the error report is too big for irc
[15:14]
foswiki_irc2http://pastebin.com/2WG4vZz6 [15:16]
gac410hm. How did you install the extension? bin/configure, debian pkg, or manual unzip? [15:18]
foswiki_irc2My wiki admin said he installed it manually and it "installed successfully". So he left me to figure out why it isn't working. [15:19]
gac410could you list the /var/www/foswiki/lib/Foswiki/Plugins directory and see if DateTimePlugin.pm is there? [15:19]
foswiki_irc2let me see
I am unable to see that directory, I will email this to the admin and have him recheck the installation.
Thank you for pointing me to the errors. I can throw this back at him now.
[15:20]
gac410it could be something like file ownership or permissions
Or if one of the "mandatory access control" systems are installed - selinux, etc. that could block access to new files.
Good luck
[15:25]
jomoattach to the email the error message too ;) :) [15:26]
foswiki_irc2Ok. Thanks again. Sorry to have brought so little information to the table. [15:26]
gac410no that's fine, we are used to playing detective :) [15:26]
foswiki_irc2Have a good weekend. [15:27]
gac410jomo, at least you've given another extension a sanity test. Did you test on 1.2? [15:28]
jomoyes - but only one example yet - from the plugin examples.. [15:29]
gac410tbh, all I'm really interested in for extensions, at least simpler ones like this, is did it install, and does it run without crashing. This one has no special handlers other than the registered DATETIME tag
So I think it's safe to mark this one tested on Foswiki 1.2.0
[15:30]
jomoYesterday was %DATETIME{"$day $month $year" incdays="-1"}% - not too much errors could be here ;) [15:30]
gac410yeah. I'd say for our purposes, we are talking about "verification" that an extension loads on 1.2, not that there are no bugs :D
Something is going on with foswiki.org The server is really really slow for simple stuff at times.
[15:31]
jomoit is pseudo installed and the configure says some errors - so needed "press the reset" button on some fields... this is exactly why i want test them on the tarbal - and with in-foswiki installation procedure.. [15:32]
gac410no idea. gmc was going to be doing some work on it today. Actually he needs to update to a new version of the os
Going out of support
[15:34]
jomoso have 8.0 :)
jomo using freebsd on all his servers too.. ;)
[15:34]
***foswiki_irc2 has left [15:36]
jomothis was an clear example - one of the problems with FO... we have too much extensions and only very few are installed on FW... - the users want test (or at least check) the extensions somewhere before installing it... ;( but install 200 plugins could be too much for the server, unles it is some 8core xeon with SSD storage... [15:39]
gac410Also, a lot need external software, and a lot are incompatible with each other.
And some add functions that tbh, I really don't want to see on our server.
[15:39]
jomo;) [15:40]
gac410Though maybe we need a ViewTemplate for Extensions that makes it clear that the extension is or is not installed. [15:40]
jomoyes - that could definitely help or just mark with the red-link the uninstalled ones or something such.. ;) [15:41]
gac410I updated the PackageForm on http://foswiki.org/Extensions/DateTimePlugin to reflect that it was tested on 1.2, and convert the old table data to the new form. [15:43]
jomosec - need one more test for localised names [15:45]
hmm i screwed something = now not works... will report... [15:50]
gac410What's that that doesn't work? [15:51]
jomoLOL
;)
the configure still have bugs ... with some plugin configs e.g. reset, undo and such...
[15:51]
gac410oh. yeah. not a surprise. Thought as long as extension installer is used, it *should* correctly update spec, etc.
pseudo-install. ... not so good.
I'm not sure CDot will accept pseudo-install triggers as configure bugs, as much as pseudo-install bugs.
We probably ought to have a pseudo-install option for the extension installer, rather than the hacky linking the pseudo-install does.
[15:55]
jomoin such situations - the configure LOSSES sometimes the {Plugins}{PluginName}{Module} information... this is the case too [15:58]
gac410Yes. That's because configure expects the installer to set those. And pseudo-install does not.
gac410 has wondered why Foswiki::Plugins doesn't just guess a module if an extension is enabled without the requisite {Module} setting :P
[16:02]
jomono, you cant say it works - because it doesnt works with accented month/day names - need to be fixed.. [16:03]
gac410Oh. hm. utf8 issue. [16:03]
jomoSab, 13 Jůn 2015
yes
[16:03]
gac410The extension is iso-8859-1 encoded. yech. how the heck do we resolve that.
re-encode the topics to Site CharSet during installation?
[16:04]
jomohm... - [16:05]
gac4101.2. core has a similar problem. But we use entities &copy; for ex, instead of the copyright symbol. Have to be very careful that all topics in the 1.2 distribution are ascii only. [16:05]
jomoegg vs chicken problem [16:05]
gac410Extensions have a much more difficult issue.
They can be installed on a site using any encoding. We can't predict it.
So that's always been an issue, but is now exposed because we've changed the 1.2 default to utf-8
Maybe declare an encoding in the Extension package, and have Foswiki::Configure::Package re-encode from default to {Store}{Encoding} during the installation?
[16:05]
jomosimply the 1.1.9 should be last FROZEN foswiki with iso1. from 1.2 (everything should be utf8 - and if someone doesn't want convert - must staty with 1.1.9) - and the FO weill need different plugin repo for the 1.2+
IMHO on-the-fly converting will have much issues later... the simplest is IMHO have separate extensions for the 1.2+
[16:08]
gac410It's a deeper issue. say site is using EUC-JP, then the problem existed today, when they get an iso-8859-1 file set copied in.
A separate extensions repo means we have to rebuild, re-encode & upload every extension?
[16:10]
jomoif someone has EUC-JP and could use 1.1.9 - ok - he could use it later too. but for the 1.2 he needs convert the EUC-JP to utf8... [16:11]
gac410Why. They can just set {Store}{Encoding} and it should continue to work. Our install guide doesn't say they MUST convert to utf-8 [16:12]
jomoand he could to use utf8 extensions and new features... IMHO (in difference with CDdot) i don't think than we CAN supoort correctly the BAD core and the good one - with ONE extensions web... this is true only for pure ascii..
thats IMHO - my view is somewhat (and somethimes) different from the FF core-team view :)
[16:12]
gac410Granted migration to utf8 is a strongly recommended option. But existing sites with large webs should be able to continue to work as long as {Store}{Encoding} matches the data. [16:14]
jomosimply the core changed. the extensions uses the core. so, if they want support the BAD core (pre 1.2) they must implememt some logic... [16:14]
gac410With our current population of developers, I cannot imagine any scenario where every extension is rebuilt for utf-8 core. I'm having a hard time imangining how they will even be tested. [16:15]
jomowe can patch some extansions for work with the new core - but patching them in way (as CDot suggest) e.g. useing the Foswiki::UNICODE flag - is an double work... could helps for old installations but sooner or later everybody will be on utf8 ;)
for the ASCII word nothing changes.... :)
[16:16]
gac410well let's separate API issues and UNICODE flag. from the Extension installation process. They are unrelatd. [16:17]
jomoyes - ok [16:17]
gac410The Extension installer, Foswiki::Configure::Package does a simple copy of untarred data into the existing Store.
That's always been safe because just about everyone used iso-8859-1 And I don't think we ever considered other Site charsets. Plus most extensions didn't use high characters.
[16:17]
jomoinstallation (from the lib/* scripts point of view works). We can convert the data/*.txt to the new Store.Charset in-fly - but here are dragons... (maybe) hex-encoded characters and so on... [16:18]
gac410Right. I'm not saying it's foolproof, I guess the question from foswiki_irc1 today was serendipitous. Picked one extension that had non-ascii characters in the topic. [16:19]
jomoalso, this plugin DateTime uses for the localised names &aacute; (entities) - what are works. but when in the configure i changes the entities into pure utf8 - it stopped to work.. [16:20]
gac410Okay, open a task for this please. Obviously multiple issues to figure out. [16:20]
jomoand this is from the plugin spec.. afaik - and automatically converting plugin-spec character-set... hm... smell to me as a problem
okay
[16:21]
.... (idle for 16mn)
gac410gmc Not sure which way to reach you, but definitely a dns issue. I've send you some emails with debugging results. [16:37]
jomoPLEASE check the http://foswiki.org/Tasks/Item13446 and repair my broken english ;) [16:38]
gac410will do. If it ever loads :D
and there we go
[16:38]
jomojust use the 82.94.245.62 ;) [16:39]
the config.spec files are somewhat loaded into perl. (they're a perl code, so probably with "require" or "do {..." and such..) so wondering, how the core deals with the accented characters in the config.spec files? expects utf8? latin1? - this could probably answer only CDot exactly... [16:48]
gac410yeah. that's probably the case. I'm turning your task into a bit of a developers discussion, but it probably needs to move to the Development web at some point. [16:49]
Okay jomo, I've hijacked your task. Changed it to urgent, and against configure, BuildContrib, ... [16:58]
jomogood comment - imho, fw reaches the point as Apple when Jobs is returned. He simply DROPS the old system, (and maintains some compatibility layer few years) - but the developent is focused only TO NEW. e.g. no fixes was made to OS9 (the old Mac system) - only developed teh new OS X... (and see the result - it is simply an wonderful system). So, IMHO, Fw should do the same. 1.1.9, 1.1.9{1,2,...n} is the OLD system. The developent should be focus
only to the new one (1.2+) - and (somewhat) need maintain compatibility layer... ;)
[16:59]
gac410DateTimePlugin is a victim :) [16:59]
jomoomg - CDot will kill me ;) [16:59]
jastthe problem with making something completely new is that it needs a lot of development effort [17:00]
jomowe already have the new [17:00]
jastwe have _progress_ [17:00]
jomo(mean utf8 core ) :) [17:00]
jastand substantial progress at that
but it's not the same level of difference as between OS9 and OS X :)
[17:00]
jomothe core change to utf8 is MAJOR change. simply maintain two layers on OK and one BAD (and TBH the current 1.1.9 is bad) is waste of the developers time (and we havent to much developers anyway)... thats imho... [17:02]
gac410It would probably be much less time to let 1.2 pkg installer fix up encoding, than to try to separate the extensions web into two webs and rebuild everything or abandon the past. [17:03]
jomoi could (want, can) assist with patching, detecting erros and so - in the extensions, but - mainitain them to be compatible with something what is clearly bad design - is simply too much work...
e.g. 1.1.9 - froze. 1.1.91 (critical bug-fixes and such) but the new developemnt only and clearly utf8...
[17:03]
gac410so for one thing we don't know how big the issue is. Extensions with simple macros are probably already compatible.
Is it 5 extensions that will have operational issues with utf8 core? 10? 100? we have absolutely no idea.
[17:05]
jomomany of extenstions simy works... such ImagePlugin works without any problems... (not tested deeply, but the basics works ok)...
the DirectedGraphPlugin needs two patches... one is already supplied in some Task...
and so on...
[17:05]
gac410So the *encoding* issue. BuildContrib needs to somehow mark the encoding used in the uploaded extension. And extension installer needs to re-encode to the {Store}{Encoding}
If not marked, then it's iso-8859-1, which was our old default
I suspect that it will be mostly a simple issue. And fixes what was probably a long-standing issue for *any* site using other than iso-8859-1
The Config.spec issue is completely separate. Need CDot's consulting on that one.
pseudo-install is yet another issue, and pseudo-install should DIE DIE DIE :P
(the script, not the function )
[17:07]
jomothe USA people (read Ascii) hasn't any issues. The new and old will works same, unless they want to use words like resumé. All others (counting the west-eu - iso1) SHOULD convert to utf8. period. We are in 21th century - omg. :) ;) :)
jomo is again once hot-headed... ;)
[17:11]
gac410the Extension installer wizard should have a -symlink option, which allows it to symlink if the encoding is compatible, otherwse make it a conventional install
gac410 is working on a CharsetConverterContrib version that 1) Works on Foswiki 1.2, 2) Can convert just a single web, 3) Can override the configured {Store}{Encoding} for the source data
As I forgot to convert http://trunk.foswiki.org/Main we are left with broken encoding on t.f.o
CDot probably won't like it. But I'm desperate. :D
[17:12]
jomoone question.. (i know gac410 , youre not good with the "why" questions, but anyway). Why, we building tarbals for the extensions, instead of pulling them from the github? (with an defined branch or version number)? In such case, we could easily supply ANY extension version for the users, based on their FW version... e.g for the of FW simply will download 1.1.9 branch extension and for the 1.2 the new one... autmatically, without additional
PACKAGING work....
[17:16]
gac410Good point. why? Lack of time, Lack of devs, Some sites don't allow servers external access, so still need some sort of packaging. [17:17]
jomoyeah, i always forgit the internal installations without direct internet access...
^^forgot
[17:18]
gac410Not all extensions are in github, as not all extensions were in subversion. Some are just zipfiles someone uploaded
This is all stuff that could be done. Theology, Theory, and SMOT
simple matter of time
Github has a "release" function that will build a tarball on the fly. So that gets you part way there. Extensions installer has an undocumented feature to install from an "already expanded tarball" So close there too.
[17:18]
jomo:) you good with the why questions.. ;) [17:20]
gac410oh... and github has none of the gz / minimized / compressed sources. So js / css will be larger and slower. And with that, I need to run.
have a good day. back later tonight.
[17:23]
***gac410 has left [17:23]
jomo;)
carrying the old ballast (i understand the motivation) - is simply too hard and need too much work... sometimes in the future sure will need to say: this is deprecated and will be removed. period. One of such things is the iso1... ;) - gtg to, frieds coming to garden-grill-session... ;)
[17:24]
......................................................................... (idle for 6h3mn)
***ChanServ sets mode: +o gac410 [23:31]

↑back Search ←Prev date Next date→ Show only urls(Click on time to select a line by its url)