Clojurians
#ldnclj
<
2016-02-11
>

This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.

agile_geek07:02:13

Morning @paulspencerwilliams

agile_geek07:02:55

Quick reminder - ProCloDo is at Skills Matter next Tuesday...change in venue from Salesforce's offices in Bishopsgate.

agile_geek07:02:07

Sign up on Skills Matter website

agile_geek07:02:01

@paulspencerwilliams: just to remove confusion the 'Morning' was to you and everyone..the announcement to everyone not just you!

malcolmsparks08:02:33

Morning cold isn't it

thomas09:02:46

yes, it is [email protected]#$dy cold. had to do the school walk today …. :ice_skate:

agile_geek09:02:43

Call this cold? When I wer' lad it was so cold fingers fell off.....they grew back.

mccraigmccraig10:02:51

you were a lad in t' little ice age @agile_geek ?

agile_geek10:02:08

@mccraigmccraig: yeah, I'm that old!

mccraigmccraig10:02:18

i was wondering the other day... when the thames used to freeze over, what happened to it's massive tidal range ? did the ice move up and down too ?

thomas10:02:35

I guess it would. and would there be less tidal range if the river was wider?

thomas10:02:56

as in the water not being pushed up as much?

mccraigmccraig10:02:39

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Thames_frost_fairs is pertinent... ice was 11 inches thick in london in 1683/4... which would have to move with the tide, since it's nothing like thick enough to bridge the river

thomas10:02:59

:simple_smile:

thomas10:02:09

11 inches is a lot of ice.

thomas10:02:53

and the river was wider and slower.

thomas10:02:06

I suspect that would make a difference as well

mccraigmccraig10:02:50

yeah, i guess a significant part of the tidal range of the current thames in london is because of the emabankment

agile_geek10:02:40

the tidal range would definitely have been less

agile_geek10:02:19

it's reach inland would have been less to due to a wider, shallower estuary too

agile_geek10:02:44

but the ice would have floated up and down.

mccraigmccraig14:02:35

anyone know what the score is with the prismatic->plumatic github org rename ?

dominicm14:02:40

@mccraigmccraig: Weird

glenjamin14:02:17

i heard the company pivoted, might be related?

mccraigmccraig14:02:18

yeah, i heard that too... was wondering if it's clear yet what the implications are - schema is pretty critical to a lot of stuff these days

minimal14:02:05

think a bunch of them left as well

minimal14:02:14

looks like they want to carry on with the org while not being associated with the company. (guess)

minimal14:02:21

Jason Wolfe tweeted that he was looking for work in December and he did the name change commit

thomas15:02:28

very weird indeed. But a rename shouldn’t affect schema?

glenjamin15:02:45

only as far as it’s often referred to as “prismatic schema"

paulspencerwilliams16:02:52

Send help, I’m elbow deep in Angular debugging!

thomas20:02:36

@glenjamin: good point… I guess that just “schema” is to generic.

gjnoonan21:02:03

Evening all