Depending on exactly how T8026 sorts out, we might also have a stronger "public event" vs "private event" state in the future.

In T8209, we hit an issue where a migration performed a cache fill as a side effect of loading handles. This created a problem because the cache fill happened from a migration that runs before the cache was introduced.

In the long term, I think we should probably add an interaction with T4571 to reduce the likelihood of these issues. I'll make some notes there.

D12857 should fix the issue with list views (including /upcoming/).

Ah, thanks! I'll clean that up.

One other signal we could use is adding or removing backgrounds from icons, if we add them:

Few different parts:

... on the host

I'd exec ssh directly. If there's some major advantage to using libssh2 (but what?), I'd possibly use that optionally if it was available on the host.

Should be fixed in HEAD. Thanks for the report!

Presumably obsoleted by T8151, reopen if this is still an issue at HEAD.

Presumably obsoleted by T8151, reopen if this is still an issue at HEAD. This is probably a Chrome bug if it's not fixed at HEAD.

Presumably obsoleted by T8151, reopen if this is still an issue at HEAD.

Presumably obsoleted by T8151, reopen if this is still an issue at HEAD.

Presumably obsoleted in HEAD.

Obsoleted in HEAD.

This should be resolved in HEAD because we no longer frame the page content. Chrome still has the underlying bug.

I'm going to tentatively call this resolved since things have been quiet for a few days now, but I'll keep an ear open for more feedback.

If this doesn't do anything bad and you can't reproduce it reliably, I'm just going to close this until someone is materially affected by it.

Is "2015-05-14 19:34 GMT+02:00 Me <its.me@mario>" a standard header for Gmail quoted text in French? Is it a standard signature? I'm confused because neither of your examples actually contain any quoted text.

What mail client did you use to send that mail?

Ah, perfect.

Just doing phlog($ex) might be useful (or phlog(new Exception()) if you aren't actually catching one).

I can't immediately reproduce this -- do you have a trace in the Apache/php-fpm error log?

Yeah, I think we can probably slim them down a hair and make them work. Installs that define 200 priorities will get questionable results, but I don't feel too bad about that.

In T8135#113908, @chad wrote:

I had originally designed dividers into the columns for clarity. We removed them since typically they're clutter, but I wonder if we could instead just activate them when hovering a card over a column.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'lightly used'.

Sorry, this is a lot harder to build than it seems like it might be, and probably not appropriate for a contributor. In particular:

I think the likely way forward is:

To clarify, this is a visual glitch only.

In a future where we have automatic escalation rules, "escalate automatically" vs "do not escalate automatically" makes sense.

In T8062#113752, @btrahan wrote:

More accurately, this stuff would be awesome, just building / supporting it versus the user alternative of busting out photoshop or paint or what have you isn't worth it.

This is now resolved for non-meme cases.

This is how I sneak around >_> <_<

@btrahan, @chad, curious if you guys have any use cases for "Sporadic" vs "Away" -- I couldn't really come up with any, and if we don't get rid of this we probably need to make it per-user instead of per-event so it would be simpler to toss it if we don't have a good use case.

In T4830#74187, @epriestley wrote:

(@btrahan, you're the only repro I have, so don't change your profile picture!)

I believe T7879 is the root issue here, which will be resolved shortly in connection with T7707.

Or, more specifically:

Oh, it doesn't actually create any peril until we try to use images larger than 50x50px (I was confusing it with some other unrelated issues), but I think it's still better to fix it now. It looks like using 100% works fine.

At this point, I strongly suspect we'll never support XMPP in the upstream: it's just too large and complex a dependency for too little value.

D12821 creates a bit of a problem: the CSS will expect 100x100 images, but all old profile images will be 50x50.

For T7707, I'd tentatively like to do this:

Tentatively, the bucketing rules might change to:

I was planning to try make "comment" work somewhat like a "soft reject" at some point, but this was before T1279. After T1279, I haven't seen much feedback to the effect that this is important (I think essentially all feedback since T1279 -- other than this case -- is related to cases like the one discussed in T8080 -- roughly, revisions appear in a bucket based on the overall revision state right now, but viewers expect them to appear in a bucket based on their personal reviewer state).