Re: [PHP-WEBMASTER] Dealing with CFP / Conference dates

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Peter Cowburn <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>
> On 26 February 2015 at 15:40, Paul Dragoonis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have been out of the country on business and my php.net environment
>> setup
>> is back home on my laptop. I'm wishing there was an easy way to set up a
>> VM
>> + php.net mirror setup on a box so I could have done it on my client's
>> machine, but that's a different conversation altogether.
>>
>
> Setting up a php.net website mirror, for development, these days is as
> simple as git clone and using the built-in web server.  Playing around with
> the various generated files (e.g. those on master, that get rsync'd to
> mirrors) is a little more fuss, but not much more than cloning master,
> running the scripts and cp-ing to your web clone.
>

Can you elaborate on this? There needs to be a .php script on master, which
creates a .json file which is rsynced to mirrors. I need to get this .php
script in the repo somehow.

>
> That said, it would be nice to have a VM or something (I've been thinking
> about this for the docs) to download and magically have a development env
> all set up.
>

It would be worth while investment of our (the web team's time) i'm sure!
It would make the contribution barrier lower.


>
>
>>
>> The code was already submitted a while back for this, but there's still a
>> few blockers for me.
>> 1) I can commit into the website repo, but I can't commit into the '
>> master.php.net' repo.
>> 2) If I'm not granted commit access to master.php.net, then I need to be
>> able to make a Pull Request to it. The problem here is we don't have the
>> ''
>> master.php.net' repository on github so I can't PR against it.
>>
>
> Not being able to submit a pull request isn't much of a blocker. We worked
> for years with patches attached to emails.  (This sounds far more blunt, as
> I'm reading this back, than I intended!)
>
> Apologies if I simply missed it, do you have an up-to-date patch for the
> different git repos that we can look over? If it's only on your laptop back
> at home, we can wait.
>

I have the patch, it was submitted months ago via email and nobody
committed it for me :-). I'm happy to rebase on top of the latest repo
HEADs since it's been a while of course.


>
>
>>
>> Can someone sort this out either my commit karma, or github repos so I can
>> progress?
>
>
> I'm sure it's not a problem to grant you karma, but even if it was there
> are still plenty of people who do have karma and can commit patches.
>

Karma or PR (for master repo) - let me know what you wanna do, as long as
it's my name on the commit then it doesn't matter to me how it got there.


>
>
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> Paul
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Eli <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > I'd like to make the point, once again, that we are supposed to be
>> > moving away from this system altogether :)
>> >
>> > For months now we've been waiting for the 'new system' that completely
>> > removes this task from us.  (In fact I've been waiting to submit my own
>> > conference while 6-7 have come through), just because I didn't want to
>> > add to a system that was on the verge of being removed.
>> >
>> > So I'll ask again.   Can we get the new code pushed live that
>> > automatically does the conferences by Joind.in?   As it's the 'end goal'
>> > anyway, it solves this issues mentioned here, and ... everyone has
>> > already said yes.
>> >
>> > Eli
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2/26/15 3:49 AM, Peter Cowburn wrote:
>> > > On 26 February 2015 at 08:29, Stelian Mocanita <
>> > [email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Would it make sense to extend the tool so when you select CFP and
>> > >> Conference as categories to ask for both dates and content? Right now
>> > the
>> > >> organisers have to return after end of CFP and provide new content
>> and
>> > we
>> > >> have to update it. I do not necessarily have an issue with updating
>> the
>> > >> entries, but I would so love to automate this and do it once and once
>> > only.
>> > >>
>> > >> Thoughts?
>> > >>
>> > > I think we should be having entirely separate entries for a CFP
>> versus a
>> > > conference announcement, rather than going back and editing a CFP
>> entry
>> > > once it is closed (and we've been given updated text).  Conflating the
>> > two
>> > > types of entries doesn't make much sense, to me.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> Stelian
>> > >>
>> > >> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Hannes Magnusson <
>> > >> [email protected]> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:09 AM, Stelian Mocanita
>> > >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >>>> Hello everyone,
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> What would be a good way to deal with the CFP / Conference date?
>> Most
>> > >> if
>> > >>>> not all of the conferences have different dates, and organisers
>> submit
>> > >> it
>> > >>>> all at once.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Is there any decent way we can work around this? Maybe add a CFP
>> date
>> > >>> and a
>> > >>>> conference date to the news item?
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The dates definitely should be in the news entry itself - otherwise
>> > >>> the organizers are simply being mean to the people reading the entry
>> > >>> :/
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Originally when I cared for markup it was all semantically tagged
>> and
>> > >>> pretty using microformats and eRDF, which exposed hCalendar entries
>> > >>> which could be easily imported as they contained location and dates
>> > >>> and descriptions and what not. Shame that became uncool.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> -Hannes
>> > >>>
>> >
>> > --
>> > |   Eli White   |   http://eliw.com/   |   Twitter: EliW   |
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>