[16:22:24 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> The external data conversations are getting complicated over email. There are several factors involved now. How about a hangout?
[16:23:10 CDT(-0500)] <js70> sounds good.
[16:24:40 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> and i see unicon mail servers are quarantining some ssp-dev messages. how helpful
[17:23:25 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> opened a unicon support ticket for the mail issue… for all of those who are just dying to get the next batch of ssp-dev mail
[17:25:32 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> JS and Dan- I noticed one other thing with the external_student_transcript table while updating the definitions. the gpa is the only nullable column in the table. that seems completely backwards to me. Reluctantly, I suggest that we also fix it with 1.2 because we are now displaying gpa
[17:26:07 CDT(-0500)] <js70> k
[17:26:20 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> the description (which comes from the legacy spreadsheet) says that SSP will calculate the gpa if provided. that appears to be the original functionality for the system.
[17:27:13 CDT(-0500)] <js70> we are agreed thats not a good idea going forward?
[17:27:34 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> it's the opposite of how we agreed to handle gpa's on the hangout
[17:27:34 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> think of it as an enhancement by removal
[17:27:57 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> hahaha
[17:28:06 CDT(-0500)] <js70> :^)
[17:28:11 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> yes, you can no longer shoot yourself in the foot, but you'll thank us for it
[17:28:25 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> I'll go ahead an create a ticket to remove an enhancement
[17:35:58 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> that's the kind of project management every project would benefit from!
[17:49:37 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> do we want to change the EA roster drop-down functionality in 2.0 then?
[17:49:49 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> making the columns non-nullable, etc
[17:51:29 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> https://issues.jasig.org/browse/SSP-733 was intended as a sort of umbrella for that
[17:52:01 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> think there ended up just being some wholesale implementation of the 1.2 schema changes in one big shot tho
[17:53:41 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> so does the UI enforcement, aka app failing to start, live in a point release of a major/dot release?
[17:55:16 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> that's a tough one. the approach actually proposed in the email thread was a bit more gentle. i.e. once you thought you had it right, you'd throw a switch and the next restart would blow up if you hadn't gotten it right
[17:55:29 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> this is not quite the same as what we discussed in the hangout
[17:55:40 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> which was more "at some point in time you will just have no choice"
[17:56:15 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> but i dont see why we couldn't plan to be more draconian in 2.0
[17:56:36 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> and call it all off if people can't even get the optional stuff right in 1.2
[17:56:38 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> I'd feel better about a major rather than dot
[17:56:42 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> sure sure
[17:57:48 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> JS- I missed highlighting two columns in the spreadsheet I sent you. The Jira issue 857 is accurate.
[17:58:25 CDT(-0500)] <js70> k, I'll make sure to validate between the two.
[17:58:47 CDT(-0500)] <js70> trust AND verify
[17:59:15 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> definitely verify. I've been a little less than 100% accurate lately
[17:59:49 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> 2 points to the person who figures out why unicon mail servers quarantined this thread: http://jasig.275507.n4.nabble.com/Question-About-Case-Management-report-tt4658782.html
[18:00:16 CDT(-0500)] <js70> CUM how fun
[18:00:23 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> we have a winner
[18:00:46 CDT(-0500)] <js70> really changes the meaning of the thread!
[18:00:51 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> if I had the same encouragement that Dan M has throughout the day, I'm sure I would be at least 100%
[18:01:32 CDT(-0500)] <js70> Exactly. A lucky man.
[18:01:54 CDT(-0500)] * dmccallum54 blush
[18:02:26 CDT(-0500)] <js70> So my question is, does this go in my quarterly report?:-$
[18:03:07 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> mine or yours?
[18:03:30 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> cuz it's all over that thread
[18:03:33 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> so to speak
[18:03:38 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> ok. that's probably enough of that
[18:03:52 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> good thing this is being logged
[18:04:10 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> It's time to scrub the logs
[18:04:12 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> hate for the Internet (and HR depts everywhere) to miss out on this
[18:05:36 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> JasonElwood have you seen any trouble with sqlserver since 856 went in
[18:06:44 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> I don't believe so, but let me check the logs
[18:09:01 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> 1.1 blew up on me b/c it thought the UDF function created by 000025.xml already existed. not sure if that was just my own carelessness during development or a genuine problem.
[18:10:34 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> I don't see any errors in the log. I definitely didn't get any deployment errors. from a spot check of 5-6 JEs, they all look good.
[18:11:05 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> thx
[18:12:18 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> Has anybody noticed a slower response within your local SSP this week? It is noticeably slower since Monday.