wmoore

Linked List

• wmooreJan 31, 2014, 12:35 AM

  0 points

  in reply to: Morendil’s comment on: Vol­un­teer­ing pro­gram­mer hours /​ dis­cussing how to im­prove LessWrong’s soft­ware

  Please note that as of late last year the official development environment is now built with Vagrant. The primary repo contains a Vagrantfile and all the chef recipes (derived from our production recipes where possible) necessary to configure a base Ubuntu box for LW development.

  The instructions for using this are at: Development-VM-Image.

• wmooreJan 28, 2014, 11:00 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: ChrisHallquist’s comment on: Vol­un­teer­ing pro­gram­mer hours /​ dis­cussing how to im­prove LessWrong’s soft­ware

  Great to hear you’re interested in contributing Chris. The LW codebase takes a bit to get your head around so I’d certainly suggest starting with smaller bugs or small features before diving into big new features. You should definitely get in touch with us (TrikeApps) and Luke to discuss what you want to work on to make sure it’s the best use of your time and your approach considers all angles.

  For reference, Accepted issues are generally bugs. The Accepted status indicates they have been reviewed and acknowledged as a bug. Approved is used to indicate tickets that are approved for work (generally by Lucas). These are good candidates to work on but you should definitely coordinate with us to make sure they aren’t being worked on already.

• wmooreNov 26, 2013, 12:25 AM

  20 points

  in reply to: Pfft’s comment on: Open Thread, Novem­ber 15-22, 2013

  SiteMeter in the sidebar was the cause of this. It has been removed.

  What links here?

  • [QUESTION]: LessWrong web traf­fic data? by VipulNaik (Jul 7, 2014, 9:41 PM; 6 points)

• wmooreFeb 4, 2013, 9:37 PM

  14 points

  on: [Meta] Server Slow

  I received a lot of errors over the weekend relating to a performance regression introduced in the last set of changes. Eugine, you were one of the people affected by these errors. I released a fix for this yesterday and have not seen those errors since. Work is also underway to migrate to a new database server.

• wmooreJan 29, 2013, 11:38 PM

  11 points

  in reply to: Vladimir_Nesov’s comment on: [minor] Separate Upvotes and Down­votes Implimented

  Ok, it has been reverted.

• wmooreJan 29, 2013, 10:10 PM

  14 points

  in reply to: Emile’s comment on: [minor] Separate Upvotes and Down­votes Implimented

  John implemented the new feature, I just integrated it and deployed it.

• wmooreJan 29, 2013, 10:08 PM

  3 points

  on: [minor] Separate Upvotes and Down­votes Implimented

  This is actually a bug, not a feature. Some major changes to how karma is stored and passed around the application were made in order to implement the percentage tooltips. Scores are now passed around as an array containing the number of up votes and down votes, where previously it was the difference of the two. It appears the this array is being incorrectly rendered in the side bar, instead of the calculated score.

• wmooreJan 29, 2013, 10:05 PM

  4 points

  in reply to: Douglas_Knight’s comment on: [minor] Separate Upvotes and Down­votes Implimented

  You’re correct, John deliberately changed this as he thought it was a bug. I’ll chat to some people to work out what the desired behaviour is.

• wmooreSep 21, 2012, 1:04 AM

  3 points

  in reply to: jimrandomh’s comment on: Less Wrong Polls in Comments

  I’ve just deployed a fix that will apply to all new poll votes. Thanks jimrandomh for passing on the bug report and initial patch.

• wmooreSep 19, 2012, 11:48 PM

  4 points

  in reply to: jimrandomh’s comment on: Less Wrong Polls in Comments

  Your fix for the incorrect median calculation has been deployed.

• wmooreAug 2, 2012, 11:10 PM

  22 points

  on: PM sys­tem is not work­ing

  Fix for this and issue 327 has been deployed.

• wmooreApr 20, 2012, 6:43 AM

  0 points

  on: De­ploy Test

  Test in Chrome

Meetup : Melbourne, Fri­day 1st July 7pm

• wmooreJan 27, 2011, 3:17 AM

  16 points

  on: Meta: A 5 karma re­quire­ment to post in discussion

  2 karma points are now required to start a new discussion. We’ll see how this goes at reducing the spam.

Post-de­ploy Test

• wmooreSep 20, 2010, 2:51 AM

  0 points

  on: De­ploy Test

  yo again

• wmooreSep 20, 2010, 2:50 AM

  0 points

  on: De­ploy Test

  yo

De­ploy Test

• wmooreMay 24, 2010, 5:21 AM

  4 points

  in reply to: Morendil’s comment on: LessWrong down­time 2010-05-11, and other re­cent out­ages and instability

  Morendil your latest patch has been applied and deployed. We took the liberty of inverting the preference for two reasons: Firstly it made more sense for the checkbox to be checked when the kibitzer was enabled and secondly we added a note that full compatibility requires Firefox for now, the text of which was hard to phrase with the uncheck to enable behaviour.