Adding Operations, but not sure where this task should actually go

@AndyRussG working on getting you some help here from one of the MCR engineers

@hashar thanks, so basically what we need to do is modify the config file to remove the jobs we no longer need, correct?

@MSantos @Mholloway Just following up on comments from yesterday:

Just tagging Reader's Web for them to track

Can you explain the use case for generator usage?

@Jdlrobson we should talk about your workflow so we can understand it.

@WMDE-leszek no problem, thanks for looking into it!

@WMDE-leszek can you say why this is blocked now? Just saw… thanks!

@Dbrant is going to write a script to see if he can break the service by adding pages from every project that the app supports.

@Jdlrobson @ssastry This seems not to be expanded in Parsoid and Mobile View APIs… ideas why?

@Pchelolo do you have any other objections or were you just looking to reuse schemas for consistency?

thanks all… we will keep this open and look into it again after we get the code base split up as @bearND suggests

Just a thought on the overloaded field...

Adding @Lydia_Pintscher for visibility

@siebrand @Addshore @daniel hey would one of you be able to review the attached gerrit patches? Or do you recommend someone else who would be better?

@Mholloway @mobrovac is this still an issue? Wondering if we need to prioritize it

@Jdlrobson @bearND can we clarify if work is needed here? And if so which team?

@bearND are we good to close this?

FYI I moved this to the kanban board to do column, but you don't have to do this before other work, just wanted to resolve the open question

All of these solutions are fine with me…

As far as suggestions, either per project or an aggregate end point both work for me.

@Mholloway The part I'm not sure about is that this seems to be implicit. -1 and -2 does not clearly mean "non-editible" without knowledge of Parsoid's/MCS's business logic

@ovasileva @Jdlrobson finally got around to triaging this on the RI board.

Bikesheding… I'll be more disciplined about opening tickets

@Mholloway has this been addressed in your Media API work

Just handling this in the thumb API

Very open ended and not actionable. If we want to reopen, lets make a specific ticket to implement.

@bearND is this still an issue?

Also do we maintain it?

@bearND is this within the MCS codebase or separate?

@Mhurd yes, prioritize this over the references!
Thanks :)

I get that it’s in a different hierarchy but it’s odd to have the only api that delivers media not under the media hierarchy.

How about just site/css?

Sorry for coming in late here. But I do have an objection with using media. We have another api named media so that’s kind of confusing

In T188431#4086072, @Dbrant wrote:

@bearND Thanks for getting the patch going! To answer your questions:

• The min_version and max_version fields won't be used for this particular announcement.

I'm going to do research on this in the near term to figure out what the path forward is

So is this something we should address in the PCS @bearND

Is this in references to the Summary service? Or mobile sections?

For context: We have lots of client code with work arounds for getting the right sizes of images. So much duplication and bugs. We want to get rid of this code in the client and instead use this much more flexible proposed API.

@kchapman we are interested in picking this up in Reading Infrastructure, but haven't been able to get to it. We would still like to do this if we can find some time… I should know more in Q4 about feasibility/timing.

@bearND this is a new survey for the Android app only Beta. Can you hop on this on Monday?

Removing type seems fine to me. For the content at the bottom of the page (categories and navlist) are you suggesting we just leave them in becuase they are invisible?

Per the discussion on the ticket and at an RI meeting, we are going to decline this.

Approving this from the management side. Let me know for you need anything else

@Jdlrobson if this is done in the new summary API are we good here?

Yes, we would want to add an additional HTML field (instead of adding HTML to the text field)