brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
murphyslawbbs has joined #openwrt-devel
<Hauke>
jow: should we change the default luci theme to luci-theme-openwrt-2020 for 21.02?
<rmilecki>
Hauke: it should definitely receive some testing in master first
<Hauke>
yes
<dorf_>
Hauke: did you have a look at my bootstrap mods? (wip)
<enyc>
I hear rumours of dsl issues on xrx200 lantiq and 21.02, alas I myself not in a good position to test 21.02RC on important link.....
<enyc>
Also I'm not really sure about reliability of 21.02rc1 on xrr200 with wifi/ath10k ct firmware .... at least one with this build is rebooting itself!
opal has joined #openwrt-devel
<Borromini>
Hauke: honestly it's a step back in usability, that theme
<dorf_>
ideally the js wouldn't be relied on for rendering all the html, and would be used a bit more sparingly. as it is, theme development is an absolute pain.
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
ivanich has joined #openwrt-devel
poljar1 has joined #openwrt-devel
poljar has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
dorf_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<rmilecki>
there is no way a complete theme switch like that is going to make everyone happy
<rmilecki>
can we possible tweak existing theme instead?
<rmilecki>
*possibly
<dorf_>
rmilecki: that's what I was doing with bootstrap.
<rmilecki>
i thought bootstrap was cool before we got CSS grids and flex
<dorf_>
bootstrap was never cool :)
<dorf_>
it's just a huge waste of screen estate.
<rmilecki>
i really don't know how to handle that, everyone has its own idea for a theme :P
<rmilecki>
i was hoping that for small things (changes) we can discuss & agree on what is better
<rmilecki>
but most people seem to prefer develop sth from a scratch
<rmilecki>
instead of working on existing solution (theme)
<Borromini>
rmilecki: if you include themes people will expect support for them as well
<Borromini>
i think that's something jow highlighted before. People contribute a theme, it looks very nice, everyone is excited, then the OpenWrt codebase gets changes which breaks custom themes, but the authors have moved on or don't care anymore
<rmilecki>
true
<Borromini>
code rot is quickly visible in the web UI unfortunately
murphyslawbbs has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
xback has joined #openwrt-devel
victhor has joined #openwrt-devel
<dorf_>
I think I made it clear previously, I don't mind maintaining a theme if it's going to be used, but I'd REALLY like to see some movement towards some static html as a basis for the UI, everything done with js is just nasty.
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<dorf_>
And instead of starting from scratch I took the default theme and tried to evolve it rather than making super brash changes.
<dorf_>
I don't mind either way, if the project wants something else, no worries. Like I said, I'm happy just running it on my instance.
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
<Borromini>
dorf_: my observations were general, they weren't directed at what you said or your work.
* dorf_
nods and smiles
<jow>
Hauke: don't switch
<rmilecki>
jow: is there anything you find incorrect / broken / confusing in list of device type bridge options?
<rmilecki>
jow: i mean all those ifname / stp / forward_delay / priority / ageing_time / hello_time (...) / mtu / mtu6 / macaddr / txqueuelen / enabled ( ...)
<jow>
mtu and mtu6 are IPv4 and IPv6 specific, they shouldn't be a bridge device property
<jow>
ifname is complicated... does it refer to the name of the bridge or to the names of the bridge ports?
<rmilecki>
i found it misleading too
<rmilecki>
jow: what option name should we have instead?
<jow>
right now, config device sections are used for two purposes (and config interface sections for three purposes):
<jow>
1) specifying layer 3 IP settings
<jow>
2) declaring interfaces
<jow>
interfaces as in Linux netdevs and declaring as in triggering the creation (or capturing existing ones)
<jow>
3)
<jow>
serving as sysctl containers
<jow>
config device w/ type bridge mixes 2 & 3
<rmilecki>
config device section allows specifying IP address?!
<rmilecki>
do you mean something like
<rmilecki>
config device
<rmilecki>
option type 'bridge'
<rmilecki>
option name 'test'
<rmilecki>
option ipaddr '192.168.1.1'
<rmilecki>
?? is that going to work?
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
plntyk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<rmilecki>
jow: what's wrong with mixing 2 & 3 ? as long as it affects layer 2 device
plntyk has joined #openwrt-devel
<jow>
rmilecki: sec, phone
<jow>
gimme 10m
<rmilecki>
sure
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
Neighbor11111111 has joined #openwrt-devel
<rmilecki>
jow: [my understanding] i though that config device type bridge is UCI section that should contain label 2 options (interface name, list of ports, some bridge sysctl setup)
Neighbor11111119 has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
dorf_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<jow>
rmilecki: config interface xxx; option type bridge "inherits" config device; option type bridge settings
<jow>
rmilecki: but just an arbitrary subset, and even that collides with protocol specific options in some cases
<rmilecki>
config interface + type bridge is a mess; )
<jow>
yeah, it should be removed for good
<jow>
as for mixing sysctls + device declaration properties
<rmilecki>
i'm going to remov ethat
<rmilecki>
(remove interface type bridge)
<jow>
I am not 100% sure whether these are intersection free
<jow>
but it is probably fine
<jow>
as long as any "config device" type supports the same subset of device type agnostic sysctls
<jow>
what would be cleaner from my pov would be splitting "declarations" and "configurations" of devices
<jow>
that means reserve "config device" for layer 2 related netdev sysctls and ethtool settings
<jow>
and introduce new section types for device declarations
<jow>
that is, config bridge instead of config device; option type bridge
poljar has joined #openwrt-devel
<rmilecki>
jow: ok, i got the idea
<jow>
or config vlan instead of config device; option type vlan
<rmilecki>
i'm not sure if we need that split of sysctls
poljar1 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<jow>
probably not as long as it is consistent
<rmilecki>
i'm going to trust your opinion on that
<rmilecki>
jow: so what, can we keep sysctl & device layer 2 options in the same section?
<rmilecki>
jow: i'm not sure if i'm right, but it seems like an API choice
<rmilecki>
jow: some things can be set by sysctl, some by netmsg (like addbr)
dorf_ has joined #openwrt-devel
<rmilecki>
jow: i've to go now for a bit, for now I'm planning to keep layer 2 options & sysctls in one UCI section, let me know if you think it's a bad idea after all for some reason
<jow>
I guess it is fine, maybe you could start an etherpad or something where a mockup could be scribbled together
dorf_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
gromero has joined #openwrt-devel
dorf_ has joined #openwrt-devel
poljar1 has joined #openwrt-devel
nitroshift has quit [Quit: Gone that way --->]
poljar has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
swex has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
swex has joined #openwrt-devel
poljar has joined #openwrt-devel
poljar1 has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
Acinonyx_ has joined #openwrt-devel
Acinonyx has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
sbrown has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
sbrown has joined #openwrt-devel
poljar1 has joined #openwrt-devel
poljar has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
Acinonyx has joined #openwrt-devel
Acinonyx_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
sbrown has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Borromini has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
sbrown has joined #openwrt-devel
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
mhc has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
matteo has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
matteo has joined #openwrt-devel
decke has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
sbrown has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
dorf_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
sbrown has joined #openwrt-devel
dorf_ has joined #openwrt-devel
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
silverwhitefish has joined #openwrt-devel
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
brentmagma has joined #openwrt-devel
Namidairo has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
finsternis has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
silverballz has joined #openwrt-devel
silverwhitefish has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
AlexisEvelyn has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
AlexisEvelyn has joined #openwrt-devel
brentmagma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]