sheila
- mostly meetings
- starting to think about decisions, priorities post 1.0 and listing
out issues to discuss
- met with Hao and Peter at 543 Howard on Thursdays
- keeping up with 1.0, user questions, blog posts, stats, etc
jared
- couple of hub account deletions
- looking at wiki ban right now
- chandlproject.org restart this morning
- no explanation available or pending - mystery
- sign up for public monitoring on the todo, not implement our own
but monitor the homepage for one of the free services
- additional email out to isc yesterday
- phone tomorrow/friday
- need to read grant's post-tbox messages - seems highish priority
- move internal wiki
- found some more stuff, going to move again
* sheila - jared, we should talk more about phone/conference service,
etc
grant
- reinstalling XP machine to figure out current requirements for
building for windows
- looked a little at OpenSuse/Ubuntu build services
- reading up on trellis and rearch as before
- couple of users/dev list emails
* sheila - goal for a draft of arch plan?
* grant - for technical goals/plan i'll need to meet w pje first
jeffrey
- fixed a bunch of problems with qe widget, but apparently not all -
finished that up this working
- working on iPhone app
mimi
- aside from recent activity summarized on strat list
- another blog post re: user story
- going to pull together a blog rollup of user hacks
- thinking through productizing re-arch / chandler lite options
-- trying to come up with a list of end-user features we can shuffle
around into various configurations for mini-releases
- am worried about IMAP issues - appears to be popular feature and
blocker for people when they can't get it working
-- am unable to get IMAP working with my personal IMAP account (not
osaf), so thinking maybe Alex's "Outlook" problem isn't really
Outlook problem
pje
- meeting with Grant tomorrow afternoon 1PM PDT
- now that the BytecodeAssembler stuff is done, adding listcomp/
genexp support to PEAK-Rules
- I debated over it would be better to base the SQL conversion off of
pre-built AST vs. doing some of it in the builder
- And I think it will be better to do it over a pre-built structure,
because then it should be easier to integrate nested expressions
e.g. [(x.foo, sum(y.bar for y in x.baz)) for x in Z]
- That should be a SELECT ... GROUP BY in SQL, rather than two
separate queries.
- I'm going to just implement the AST building in PEAK-Rules so that
it builds the appropriate nested ListComp(For(...)) structure
- And then pattern matching rules can be used to "lift" the inner
queries out.
- Also, it might be a bit easier to test things that way, and it'll
certainly be a reasonable incremental step to get things moving.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
