[10:01:02 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> and now it really is Thursday
[10:01:17 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> today's project: adding un-favoriting capability to Favorites
[10:01:35 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> with possible detour to migrate a CVS repo to Git.
[10:01:56 CST(-0600)] <tlev> note there is a topic branch for favorites
[10:05:50 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> I do love me some topic branches
[10:06:21 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> I may resist the urge to create an unfavorite sub-topic-branch branched off that topic branch
[12:39:23 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> so, banging my head against intportal database initialization again, of course
[12:40:03 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> what's the issue?
[12:41:17 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> check this out:
[12:42:27 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> https://gist.github.com/8339551
[12:43:21 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> https://gist.github.com/8339567
[12:43:36 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> (loving Sublime Gist support, incidentally)
[12:44:31 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> what I think I'm doing is successfully importing a favorite-lo user, successfully importing a fragment definition pointing at that user, and then failing in importing a fragment-layout pointing at that user
[12:44:43 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> did you look at the reports in target?
[12:45:04 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> yes, that's where those two gists are coming from
[12:45:43 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> former is the data-import.txt tightened down to show the relevant successes and failure, latter is the file specifically about the failing-to-import fragment layout definition
[12:45:45 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> no detailed text file?
[12:46:18 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> https://gist.github.com/apetro/8339567 ? 
[12:46:43 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> yep
[12:47:37 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> what is your quickstart_entities/user/favorite-lo.user.xml file? Also look at the users table and see if that user is or is not present
[12:54:48 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> jwennmacher thanks, found it. had overlooked that `username` attribute hidden amongst the XML namespace cruft
[12:55:32 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> somehow I thought the username was implied from the filename. maybe should be an error or warning when it doesn't match the expectation set by the filename. added that check to my ever-growing list of rainy day projects.
[12:56:04 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> that's a convention not a requirement. the data in the xml is what matters.
[12:56:42 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> What would be good is to take the thing that you modify and either put it at the beginning of the list of attributes or put it on a separate line so you can see it right away with an editor
[12:57:05 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> e.g. in this case the username is important, the other XML cruft is not particularly important since you don't edit it
[13:01:44 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> a fine idea. also added to rainy day list. That's easy enough to do that I'll probably offer a pull request this evening accomplishing that.
[13:02:11 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> Cool.
[13:02:22 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> Don't you have commit access?
[13:06:09 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> I do, but pull requests are a convenient way to afford review of a topic branch before it lands where it can do some damage.
[13:06:24 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> Makes sense.
[13:06:51 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> Not sure this item warrants review though
[13:50:20 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> @apetro__ if it is any consolation, it is nice having a talented and not too knowledgeable person jump [back] into uPortal. The "newbies" find all the dumb little things others run that the rest of us don't run into because we've been doing it for months or longer. Fixing those dumb little things help make the project simpler and more stable for everyone
[13:51:15 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> Of course part of the problem is that the project is big enough, diverse enough, and ever changing so I think many of us keep running into areas where we are newbies.
[14:33:54 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> as long as we can keep the trip hazard load monotonically decreasing, I think we'll be in good shape.