| [06:33:16] | <symbioquine[m]> | It looks like there's nothing pending review for 4.0.0 at the moment though right: https://github.com/farmOS/farmOS/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3Av... ? |
| [07:15:46] | <mstenta[m]> | Right! We're clear to tag I think! |
| [07:16:17] | <mstenta[m]> | I just wanted to give some time to a) see if there were any errors after updating the sites I host, and b) to review the blog post |
| [07:16:35] | <mstenta[m]> | I'll work on a PR for the log->asset->farm constraint this morning |
| [07:16:56] | <mstenta[m]> | And respond to the blog post feedback (thanks symbioquine and edbob!) |
| [07:25:17] | <mstenta[m]> | > e.g. this coming Monday or Tuesday since that would give several days of the week and 1 dev call to help any folks who have been waiting for the stable release but then are trying to cram an upgrade in ASAP |
| [07:25:17] | <mstenta[m]> | symbioquine were you thinking it's a bad idea to release right before the weekend? Just realized the 20th is a Friday. :-) |
| [07:26:14] | <symbioquine[m]> | Yeah, that was part of it. Also just earlier might be better given how stuff piles up in Spring 🤷 |
| [07:26:30] | <mstenta[m]> | Ah yes gotcha |
| [07:26:55] | <symbioquine[m]> | Always tradeoffs though |
| [07:30:16] | <scfs[m]> | I hope farmOS fails |
| [07:30:45] | <scfs[m]> | gget it bought by apple actually. farmOS 26! darwinOS kernel!!! |
| [07:31:03] | * scfs[m] has left #farmos (Kicked by @mstenta:matrix.org : spam) |
| [07:31:21] | <symbioquine[m]> | That was just getting interesting... |
| [07:31:24] | <mstenta[m]> | wait was that spam? lol oh well |
| [07:31:29] | <mstenta[m]> | sorry haha |
| [11:53:16] | <mstenta[m]> | <mstenta[m]> "I'll work on a PR for the log->..." <- symbioquine: ready for review! https://github.com/farmOS/farmOS/pull/1070 |
| [11:53:46] | <mstenta[m]> | This ended up simplifying two other constraints we had added! So overall a nice change IMO. |
| [12:33:29] | <edbob[m]> | one thing about the "farm organization" stuff.. i still worry it's a bit of a gotcha, depending on assumptions user brings to it. in my case i wanted "informal tagging" essentially, since i "own" some things but i live on "rented" property, owned by an uncle. i have other family nearby and it makes sense to track everything in one site, but i can't do that with current module b/c of the constraints. e.g. i own chicken coop e.g. which |
| [12:33:29] | <edbob[m]> | can't have the land it's on as a parent. and if we have "shared" animal herds i can't really assign farm to each asset since they're mixed together. |
| [12:33:29] | <edbob[m]> | all that to say.. i'm not sure yet what i'll do, but as of now it can't involve the farm org module. fine for me, it's not urgent, but i feel it should be made more clear how "strict" the contsraints will be, before an admin enables the module |
| [12:38:53] | <mstenta[m]> | Yes! Agree 100% edbob. |
| [12:38:59] | <mstenta[m]> | Let me emphasize this from the PR: |
| [12:39:20] | <edbob[m]> | although..i think part of my "worry" is leftover from feeling like i got "stuck" after enabling the module and then not figuring out quickly how to revert that. in the end disabling the module is not that hard, so maybe no harm no foul |
| [12:39:21] | <mstenta[m]> | > We may re-assess this later, but it's easier to open things up in the future than lock things back down, so we are starting with this restriction in place. |
| [12:39:32] | <mstenta[m]> | So "opening up" becomes a feature request |
| [12:40:03] | <mstenta[m]> | But it has a lot of considerations, so this "first pass" is easiest if we keep it restricted |
| [12:40:19] | <mstenta[m]> | But that doesn't mean we won't open it up... just requires work. :-) |
| [12:41:03] | <mstenta[m]> | And one example of "opening it up" may be as simple as a checkbox that turns on/off the constraints. |
| [12:41:29] | <mstenta[m]> | Of course, once it's turned off, it's a bit trickier to turn it back on... (what happens to existing records that become "invalid"?) |
| [12:43:29] | <edbob[m]> | that all sounds fine - just wanted to make sure the perspective was in the mix somewhere |
| [12:46:59] | <edbob[m]> | fwiw one pattern i've found useful is a "nightly problem report" - to bring data discrepancies into awareness. basically run a check and send email if problems are found, then admin must manually address problems. not sure if that is something you'd want but it's one way to handle e.g. records becoming invalid. (and just offering the suggestion, not requesting it) |
| [12:47:29] | <Greg[m]> | Just FYI for anyone who missed the Conservation Planner call last week, here's the notes and feedback. https://farmos.discourse.group/t/conservation-planner-community-feedback.... Mike I don't know if you want to integrate that feedback into the Issues list or not, but hopefully that format is better than nothing. |
| [14:56:16] | * farmBOT has joined #farmos |