<     May 2017     >
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa  
    1  2  3  4  5  6  
 7  8  9 10 11 12 13  
14 15 16 17 18 19 20  
21 22 23 24 _2_5 26 27  
28 29 30 31
00:00 jkreeftmeijer joined
00:01 MarioBranco joined
00:06 jleon joined
00:08 Ven joined
00:09 jleon joined
00:12 sfaxon joined
00:14 havenwood joined
00:14 havenwood joined
00:14 gausby joined
00:17 __charly__ joined
00:20 codestorm joined
00:21 PaReeOhNos joined
00:21 maxbeizer joined
00:22 mrEngineer joined
00:26 jeramyRR joined
00:27 JoelMcCracken joined
00:29 jleon joined
00:32 m00dy joined
00:32 Antiarc joined
00:33 nighty-- joined
00:35 kronicdeth joined
00:38 jhuothoei joined
00:48 griffinbyatt joined
00:49 jleon joined
01:01 jkreeftmeijer joined
01:07 nhooyr joined
01:12 jleon joined
01:14 codestorm joined
01:17 jleon joined
01:21 jleon joined
01:28 sevenseacat joined
01:28 wpcarro joined
01:28 sourpus5 joined
01:30 PaReeOhNos joined
01:39 tomterl joined
01:40 wpcarro joined
01:44 WhiskyRyan joined
01:47 jleon joined
01:47 dj_goku joined
01:51 srxa joined
01:51 greengriminal joined
01:52 jerel joined
01:53 cdg joined
02:02 cschneid_ joined
02:02 jleon joined
02:05 chrismccord joined
02:05 Reshi joined
02:07 <Reshi> Hey I am running a umbrella app which spawns multiple phoenix endpoints listening on different ports. What's the difference between running another endpoint and using `Phoenix.Router.forward` to route requests vs a nginx reverse proxy ? I want to route based on route params
02:08 codestorm joined
02:13 wpcarro joined
02:20 m00dy joined
02:22 jleon joined
02:23 jeramyRR joined
02:26 xiamx joined
02:35 griffinbyatt joined
02:38 wpcarro joined
02:40 PaReeOhNos joined
02:42 jleon joined
02:46 jleon joined
02:47 codestorm joined
02:53 segmond joined
02:54 proteusguy joined
03:01 Reshi joined
03:01 WhiskyRyan joined
03:02 jkreeftmeijer joined
03:07 jleon joined
03:08 potatosalad joined
03:12 jleon joined
03:15 jleon joined
03:19 __charly__ joined
03:19 bhahn joined
03:27 griffinb_ joined
03:36 dj_goku joined
03:36 dj_goku joined
03:36 gvaughn joined
03:49 PaReeOhNos joined
03:50 akeating joined
03:53 jleon joined
03:58 jleon joined
04:02 wpcarro joined
04:08 refriedchicken joined
04:08 pufuddled joined
04:10 m00dy joined
04:12 jerel joined
04:14 squalloser joined
04:22 griffinbyatt joined
04:28 codestorm joined
04:29 gvaughn joined
04:31 jkreeftmeijer joined
04:32 srxa_ joined
04:33 jkreeftm_ joined
04:35 jleon joined
04:47 PSvils joined
04:48 isubasti_ joined
04:51 bhahn joined
04:58 PaReeOhNos joined
04:58 jleon joined
04:58 Tica2 joined
05:10 jkreeftmeijer joined
05:13 Cohedrin joined
05:15 dec0n joined
05:16 meandi_2 joined
05:21 jleon joined
05:24 gvaughn joined
05:24 griffinbyatt joined
05:24 dj_goku joined
05:24 dj_goku joined
05:25 jleon joined
05:27 nahtnam joined
05:32 watersoul joined
05:33 cjhowe joined
05:37 watersoul joined
05:42 <iFire> usually proxies hide the original address
05:42 <iFire> there's a protocol for it
05:51 wpcarro joined
05:55 cemilowski joined
05:59 m00dy joined
06:02 jleon joined
06:06 jleon joined
06:07 PaReeOhNos joined
06:07 craigp joined
06:08 sp4rrow joined
06:08 sp4rrow joined
06:09 mrEngineer joined
06:10 Douman joined
06:14 bhahn joined
06:23 codestorm joined
06:25 jleon joined
06:28 tuacker joined
06:32 bhahn joined
06:41 bhahn joined
06:46 cjhowe joined
06:47 cjhowe joined
06:51 fhoffmann joined
07:01 jleon joined
07:07 jleon joined
07:12 gvaughn joined
07:12 dj_goku joined
07:12 dj_goku joined
07:16 srxa joined
07:16 PaReeOhNos joined
07:17 codestorm joined
07:20 PaReeOhNos joined
07:22 srxa joined
07:24 mattyw joined
07:29 sourpus5 joined
07:35 wpcarro joined
07:35 mark_66 joined
07:43 jleon joined
07:45 ur5us joined
07:46 jleon joined
07:46 elgenie joined
07:49 ur5us_ joined
07:51 proteusguy joined
07:52 jleon joined
07:55 cemilowski joined
07:57 wpcarro joined
08:00 ejpcmac joined
08:00 m00dy joined
08:00 DisruptiveNL joined
08:04 m00dy_ joined
08:04 <barttenbrinke> Hey, I am having a weird issue with an umbrella app. If I run all the apps tests seperate, all is fine, but when I run mix test on the umbrella, I get a ** (DBConnection.OwnershipError) cannot find ownership process for #PID<0.47.0>. So for some reason the repo mode gets leaked into the next app.
08:04 sourpus5 joined
08:05 statikowsky joined
08:07 jleon joined
08:11 codestorm joined
08:12 gregman_ joined
08:13 <barttenbrinke> The thing is that the exception occurs somewhere in Ecto, so I don't have a good starting point as how to fix this.
08:13 akeating joined
08:18 PaReeOhNos joined
08:26 griffinbyatt joined
08:30 jleon joined
08:35 codestorm joined
08:37 bilal80 joined
08:42 Guest67 joined
08:53 jleon joined
08:59 jleon joined
09:00 dj_goku joined
09:00 gvaughn joined
09:01 <barttenbrinke> Further down, it complains about a "RELEASE SAVEPOINT mariaex_savepoint" statement
09:08 codestorm joined
09:18 jleon joined
09:20 ur5us joined
09:26 wpcarro joined
09:30 jleon joined
09:34 m00dy joined
09:34 lexmag joined
09:35 jleon joined
09:36 phoenix123 joined
09:37 <phoenix123> new to phoenix. need some help with changesets
09:39 <phoenix123> "i want to remove a field from the database only if it has been added before". How do express this is with changesets
09:39 <Nicd-> for some reason my Phoenix is serving totally wrong CSS in development
09:39 <Nicd-> it's running in Vagrant, maybe that's interfering with it. the CSS is built correctly to priv/static/css but it's never refreshed in Phoenix
09:43 isubasti_ joined
09:46 RxMcDonald joined
09:46 gazler_ joined
09:47 <Nicd-> it's not loading JS properly either
09:48 elgenie joined
09:48 <Nicd-> yeah, it's this issue: https://github.com/phoenixframework/phoenix/issues/1662
09:52 jkreeftm_ joined
09:55 gvaughn joined
09:56 jleon joined
09:58 marr joined
09:58 cemilowski joined
10:00 RxMcDonald left
10:02 codestorm joined
10:03 cemilowski1 joined
10:11 nhooyr joined
10:13 isubasti_ joined
10:14 ur5us joined
10:14 nhooyr joined
10:17 jleon joined
10:18 cemilowski joined
10:18 Tica2_ joined
10:20 isubasti_ joined
10:21 glasz joined
10:26 jamick joined
10:26 josevalim joined
10:27 griffinbyatt joined
10:34 cjhowe joined
10:40 jleon joined
10:40 tomaz_b joined
10:43 m00dy joined
10:44 jleon joined
10:46 mattyw joined
10:48 dj_goku joined
10:51 jleon joined
10:53 cemilowski joined
10:55 jleon joined
10:56 codestorm joined
10:58 nhooyr joined
10:58 akeating joined
11:00 Ven joined
11:03 m00dy joined
11:10 nighty-- joined
11:13 isubasti_ joined
11:13 m00dy joined
11:14 squalloser joined
11:15 jleon joined
11:15 wpcarro joined
11:16 dtcristo joined
11:18 cemilowski joined
11:18 jleon joined
11:22 jleon joined
11:25 cemilowski joined
11:26 jleon joined
11:27 griffinbyatt joined
11:30 jleon joined
11:34 isubasti_ joined
11:38 inoas joined
11:43 Ven_ joined
11:43 gvaughn joined
11:44 m00dy joined
11:46 akeating joined
11:46 jleon joined
11:50 akeating joined
11:50 Ven_ joined
11:50 codestorm joined
11:51 akeating joined
11:53 ur5us_ joined
11:54 elgenie joined
11:55 isubasti_ joined
11:58 meh` joined
11:59 srxa_ joined
11:59 jeramyRR joined
11:59 justelex joined
12:05 karreiro joined
12:05 jleon joined
12:06 <micmus> Is there a way to dynamically call a private function, if I know the name?
12:06 <micmus> e.g apply(this_module, function, args), where function is private
12:09 jleon joined
12:12 Toinne joined
12:14 pookleblinky joined
12:15 josevalim joined
12:15 isubasti_ joined
12:20 <asonge> micmus: nope.
12:20 <jer> micmus, nope, you can only call private functions with the foo() syntax
12:20 <asonge> micmus: i wanted to know this before. but i think there *might* be a way to hack it out...
12:21 <asonge> because macros.
12:21 <micmus> In this case it has to be at runtime
12:21 <micmus> It thought that might be the case, I'm going to make them public
12:21 __charly__ joined
12:22 <asonge> does it have to be a function? the way i got around this was pattern-matching
12:22 <jer> micmus, then at least @doc false it if you make it public
12:22 <asonge> the overkill solution would be to use a before compile macro, collect the defps, make another function that takes an atom and a list of arguments and invokes the function.
12:22 codestorm joined
12:23 <jer> (should tell anyone who looks at your code it's not meant to be used directly)
12:23 srxa joined
12:24 <micmus> I already do a lot of crazy things here :D For now calling it as a public function will be fine, we'll see later if it's a problem
12:24 Ven joined
12:28 griffinbyatt joined
12:32 Ven_ joined
12:36 isubasti_ joined
12:37 dj_goku joined
12:37 dj_goku joined
12:39 Ven_ joined
12:40 ssswitch joined
12:41 cemilowski1 joined
12:42 akeating joined
12:44 jleon joined
12:45 wpcarro joined
12:49 Ven_ joined
12:51 akeating joined
12:54 Ven_ joined
12:54 cdg joined
12:56 Ven joined
12:56 isubasti_ joined
13:02 ramortegui joined
13:05 jleon joined
13:06 mr_bmt joined
13:07 dimitarvp joined
13:08 jleon joined
13:08 <Ankhers> Is there a way to search for a key in postgres jsonb with ecto that doesn't use fragments?
13:09 lexmag joined
13:09 <micmus> Ankhers: no
13:09 <Ankhers> Thanks. Just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything in the documentation.
13:09 akeating_ joined
13:10 <micmus> We considered adding this at one point, but the problem was syntax for accessing arrays (since elixir does not have arrays)
13:10 <micmus> And nobody complained loud enough since :P
13:11 <Ankhers> Fair enough. I don't really think it is a deal breaker. It may be nice to have though.
13:11 akeating joined
13:12 <micmus> the problem is, we can't use foo[0] for arrays in query syntax - we'd have immediately questions why it doesn't work for lists in elixir
13:17 isubasti_ joined
13:17 <Ankhers> There are already some things that act differently or do not exist from Ecto to Elixir though, isn't there? Like the pin operator has a different meaning within Ecto queries. There is also the spread operator (...) on lists. I'm not sure if that is the right name for it.
13:18 cschneid_ joined
13:19 <micmus> That's true. But people are used to accessing arrays with [0], adding that syntax somewhere will make them want it in other places. Pin operator and ... are exotic enough not to spread
13:20 <micmus> Ugh... my nfa2dfa algorithm is buggy :(
13:21 proteusguy joined
13:22 <Ankhers> Maybe this is a dumb idea, but for that specific case, could the compiler translate `foo[0]` to `Enum.at(foo, 0)`?
13:22 <micmus> The problem is that reinforces that idea that lists are arrays. But they aren't and accessing by index is usually a bad idea
13:23 <Ankhers> Agreed. But shouldn't telling people that lists are not arrays be enough?
13:24 Ven_ joined
13:24 <micmus> Unfortunately, the experience shows, it's not
13:25 <Ankhers> That is unfortunate.
13:27 srxa_ joined
13:27 jerel joined
13:29 griffinbyatt joined
13:34 ianclark joined
13:35 m00dy joined
13:37 potatosalad joined
13:38 isubasti_ joined
13:38 gvaughn joined
13:39 kronicdeth joined
13:39 cschneid_ joined
13:40 gvaughn joined
13:41 sfaxon joined
13:48 tomaz_b joined
13:53 jkreeftmeijer joined
13:58 elgenie joined
13:59 akeating_ joined
14:01 chrismccord joined
14:02 erez joined
14:03 kronicdeth joined
14:03 <erez> Hi all, a quick question: I'm using Plug.Router and created my own custom Authentication plug. I want some routes to go through authentication and some to remain open with no authentication. What is the way to go?
14:03 maxbeizer joined
14:03 jschneck joined
14:05 jordan0day joined
14:06 tuacker1 joined
14:09 <asonge> erez: so you want to implement something like phoenix's pipelines?
14:10 <benwilson512> erez: the easiest thing with plug router is to just have multiple routers
14:11 <benwilson512> have a top level router that routes certain sub paths to other routers
14:11 <benwilson512> and then in those routers you can plug whatever you want
14:11 <erez> @asonge yes something like tghat
14:12 <erez> @benwilson512 So I should use the forward option to route to other Routers? I thought there might be some easier solution...
14:12 <asonge> well, routers are just plugs, you should be able to just call one router from the other.
14:13 jschneck joined
14:13 <erez> I know, it is just so cumbersome to have an entire router just for the sake of adding the Authentication plug in the pipeline
14:14 wpcarro joined
14:16 wsieroci joined
14:17 sourpus5 joined
14:17 codestorm joined
14:21 celyr joined
14:24 <erez> asonge: this is also very limiting since forwarding to other routers changes the path received by the end routers
14:24 __charly__ joined
14:24 celyr joined
14:24 <asonge> erez: yeah, i think i've got a possible solution here?
14:25 <erez> asonge: I'll be glad to hear about it
14:25 dj_goku joined
14:25 <micmus> erez: you could have first router handling all the unauthenticated routes and then at the end forward "/" to another one handling all the authenticated ones.
14:26 <asonge> erez: i think you can pass a private assigns to the router, and then have the auth plug see if something should be authed before it checks that way.
14:26 <asonge> between the match plug and the dispatch plug
14:27 <erez> micmus: Sounds like a good idea
14:27 <erez> asonge: Thanks I will try that
14:29 <asonge> erez: actually, this is in the docs, lol. "To specify private options on `match` that can be used by plugs before `dispatch` pass an option with key `:private` containing a map."
14:30 travis-ci joined
14:30 <travis-ci> xiamx/elixir#9 (windows_compatibility - fe26a9b : Mengxuan Xia): The build was fixed.
14:30 <travis-ci> Change view : https://github.com/xiamx/elixir/compare/30c0e518b2ea...fe26a9b36496
14:30 <travis-ci> Build details : https://travis-ci.org/xiamx/elixir/builds/236027825
14:30 travis-ci left
14:30 papachan joined
14:31 <erez> asonge: great, thanks for pointing that out
14:35 <erez> micmus: Your idea actually works but asonge's does not require an additional router so I went with that
14:35 <micmus> makes sense +1
14:37 d10n-work joined
14:38 sourpus5 joined
14:41 Guest67 joined
14:42 Patrick___ joined
14:44 lexmag joined
14:49 srxa joined
14:55 Ven joined
15:01 Ven_ joined
15:01 davidstump joined
15:03 cschneid_ joined
15:08 Ven joined
15:10 chenghiz joined
15:10 aedigix joined
15:11 codestorm joined
15:12 bhahn joined
15:15 Ven_ joined
15:16 <bphogan> Hey folks. If I’m just using plugs with Plug Router, can I conditionally apply a plug to specific routes?
15:16 <bphogan> seems like …when action in…. is only a phoenix thing, as I get when/2 is undefined
15:16 <asonge> bphogan: someone just asked a similar question...
15:17 <chrismccord> bphogan indeed it is
15:17 <bphogan> oh geez
15:17 <chrismccord> `when` is a supported plug compiler feature, but it has to be made use of by a lib
15:17 <chrismccord> Plug.Router does not use it
15:18 <asonge> bphogan: so, you know when you do `plug :match` and `plug :dispatch`, between there you can put in a new plug, and on the routes you want to conditionally apply, you can add a private value (it's in the router docs) and then kinda filter by route after that.
15:18 <asonge> second comma should be a question mark.
15:19 <bphogan> mmmm not quite sure I follow that.
15:20 <bphogan> oh. So yea I ‘m not making my own plug - I’m just trying to use BasicAuth to protect a single endpoint. Have 4 others, just need one locked down
15:21 jmiven joined
15:21 Ven_ joined
15:23 mwbrown joined
15:23 <chrismccord> bphogan : I would forward to another Plug.Router that handles locked-down routes
15:23 m00dy joined
15:25 <bphogan> Ok…. looking for examples.
15:25 <bphogan> forward "/users", to: UsersRouter
15:25 <micmus> I just spent 3 hours looking for a missing Enum.reverse :(
15:26 <bphogan> chrismccord: when you forward to a new router, you use the same paths from root?
15:27 <chrismccord> bphogan : I believe plug will set the script_name and drop the forward prefix, but I don't remember. Phoenix's forwarded behaves that way
15:27 <bphogan> like if I forward /users to UsersRouter, would UsersRouter use “/“
15:27 <chrismccord> bphogan : yes, that should be the case
15:27 <bphogan> ok
15:28 Tica2 joined
15:28 tuacker joined
15:29 smt joined
15:31 Ven_ joined
15:31 srxa joined
15:33 smt joined
15:35 wsieroci joined
15:35 <bphogan> @chrismccord excellent - splitting it apart works, and results in some cleaner code for this project too
15:35 JEG2 joined
15:35 refriedchicken joined
15:36 <bphogan> chrismccord: silly question, but if one plug forwards to another, do all the plugs in the old router apply to the forwarded one, or do I redefine them again?
15:38 rozap joined
15:38 srxa_ joined
15:39 Ven_ joined
15:41 srxa joined
15:41 Jikan joined
15:42 justelex joined
15:46 clarkkampfe joined
15:47 Ven_ joined
15:48 webnanners joined
15:49 squalloser joined
15:50 sourpus5 joined
15:50 FMJaggy joined
15:50 icecreamcohen joined
15:51 icecreamcohen joined
15:52 vnz joined
15:52 vnz joined
15:52 kennyp joined
15:53 isubasti_ joined
15:53 davidw joined
15:53 meredith joined
15:54 cxadams joined
15:55 jschneck joined
16:01 __charly__ joined
16:01 k77 joined
16:04 cemilowski joined
16:06 codestorm joined
16:09 bhahn joined
16:13 dj_goku joined
16:13 dj_goku joined
16:17 meh` joined
16:19 <jschneck> chrismccord as per phx app compositon, I added plug static to the router at / in the dependency, but the parent endpoint captures it first. I guess what you were saying is that I would need to move it out of the parent as well
16:20 cdg joined
16:20 sourpus5 joined
16:21 <jschneck> hurm, I guess it all has to be namespaced
16:24 <pookleblinky> I am using vim. My normal repl workflow uses vim-slime, which sends text to the repl in a specified tmux pane. With Elixir, this workflow isn't as smooth as most repls. Similarly a bit of a hassle with LFE.
16:24 akeating_ joined
16:24 Ven joined
16:24 webdev007 joined
16:25 <mloy> you might want to try using vim within emacs pookleblinky, alchemist.el is great
16:26 <pookleblinky> http://evanlloyd.me/2015/12/23/elixir-vim-setup/ is useful, but not really how I like to work.
16:27 srxa_ joined
16:27 <pookleblinky> mloy: alchemist also has a vim port, but it's elixir-centric. I'm interested in general erlang-aware setups.
16:28 <mloy> ahh
16:28 jeffweiss joined
16:29 codestorm joined
16:29 PaReeOhNos joined
16:31 griffinbyatt joined
16:31 Ilyes512 joined
16:46 sourpus5 joined
16:47 wpcarro joined
16:49 Ven_ joined
16:49 cjhowe joined
16:50 cjhowe joined
16:50 cjhowe joined
16:51 cemilowski joined
16:52 robotmayo left
16:52 refriedchicken joined
17:02 lexmag joined
17:02 codestorm joined
17:07 rozap joined
17:09 Cohedrin joined
17:10 cdg joined
17:11 m00dy joined
17:20 jgpawletko joined
17:22 wsieroci joined
17:28 sourpus5 joined
17:30 m00dy joined
17:31 codestorm joined
17:38 Cohedrin joined
17:41 m00dy joined
17:41 OtherAllan joined
17:43 maxbeizer joined
17:46 justelex joined
17:46 DisruptiveNL joined
17:50 Cohedrin joined
17:53 ianclark joined
17:54 <pmarreck> #phoenix Is there a way to get a value from a view to output in the layout (like there was in Rails), such as a title or header string?
17:54 jschneck joined
17:54 <chrismccord> pmarreck could you explain more what you're wanting?
17:55 <chrismccord> you mean like `content_for` ?
17:55 <chrismccord> (in rails)
17:55 <pmarreck> so I have an edit view, which wants to set a title, like "Listings - Edit", but that is actually a header rendered in the layout
17:56 <chrismccord> pmarreck : check the render_existing docs and examples. You can use it for exactly that https://github.com/phoenixframework/phoenix/blob/master/lib/phoenix/view.ex#L203-L248
17:56 justelex joined
17:56 <pmarreck> I guess I could just define that value in the controller action
17:57 <pmarreck> and bring it in via assigns
17:57 <pmarreck> @chrismccord thanks!
17:58 ikcerog joined
17:58 tomfbiz joined
17:59 JuanMiguel joined
18:00 elgenie joined
18:01 dj_goku joined
18:01 dj_goku joined
18:01 <chrismccord> pmarreck : yw. render_existing is exactly what you want for this case
18:04 <tomfbiz> I'm writing a controller that will only redirect for HTML requests and not for AJAX/JSON. How can I tell which is which? Do I need to dig through the headers "by hand"?
18:04 travis-ci joined
18:04 <travis-ci> elixir-lang/elixir#14713 (jv-unicode - b56cc92 : José Valim): The build passed.
18:04 <travis-ci> Change view : https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/compare/jv-unicode
18:04 <travis-ci> Build details : https://travis-ci.org/elixir-lang/elixir/builds/236098605
18:04 travis-ci left
18:07 <asonge> tomfbiz: kinda/sorta? you might use this as an example on how to access the header: http://elviovicosa.com/blog/2016/07/27/phoenix-api-versioning-accept-header.html
18:07 <asonge> but you shouldn't have to *parse* the header yourself.
18:09 isubasti_ joined
18:12 justelex joined
18:12 travis-ci joined
18:12 <travis-ci> elixir-lang/elixir#14714 (jv-unicode - 35a9d38 : José Valim): The build passed.
18:12 <travis-ci> Change view : https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/compare/b56cc927f44b...35a9d38fda77
18:12 <travis-ci> Build details : https://travis-ci.org/elixir-lang/elixir/builds/236099003
18:12 travis-ci left
18:14 <tomfbiz> asonge: so "Application.get_env(:plug, :mimes)" should return what I want in a map?
18:15 DeadTrickster joined
18:16 <asonge> tomfbiz: that part isn't really necessary if the mimes are somewhat well-known.
18:18 <nox> asonge: I'm pretty sure you meant to say memes here.
18:18 <asonge> nox: usually one might think so
18:18 <nox> :D
18:18 <nox> Don't let your memes be mimes!
18:20 travis-ci joined
18:20 <travis-ci> elixir-lang/elixir#14715 (jv-unicode - 0045569 : José Valim): The build passed.
18:20 <travis-ci> Change view : https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/compare/35a9d38fda77...004556957491
18:20 <travis-ci> Build details : https://travis-ci.org/elixir-lang/elixir/builds/236102617
18:20 travis-ci left
18:29 <scrogson> tomfbiz: you should be able to check the format of the request....
18:31 <scrogson> conn.private[:phoenix_format]
18:32 griffinbyatt joined
18:37 <tomfbiz> Asonge: This got me unstuck. Thanks! (In js, I was setting the content-type but not the accepts mime type, which was confusing me)
18:38 squallstter joined
18:40 jleon joined
18:43 Sigma00 left
18:51 elgenie joined
18:53 inoas joined
18:57 sourpus5 joined
18:58 watersoul joined
18:59 PaReeOhNos joined
19:00 aedigix joined
19:02 TinkerTyper joined
19:03 FMJaggy joined
19:04 jadams joined
19:04 dormiens joined
19:04 amontalenti joined
19:05 weaksauce joined
19:07 codestorm joined
19:07 PaulSC joined
19:10 cjhowe joined
19:15 luisjotarz joined
19:19 PaReeOhNos joined
19:19 test123 joined
19:30 sourpus5 joined
19:39 justelex joined
19:40 bhahn joined
19:46 Cohedrin joined
19:47 ur5us joined
19:50 dj_goku joined
19:50 dj_goku joined
19:51 sourpus5 joined
19:52 JuanMiguel joined
19:53 PaReeOhNos joined
19:56 codestorm joined
19:59 Cohedrin joined
20:05 sourpus5 joined
20:09 codestorm joined
20:12 karmajun_ joined
20:12 Cohedrin joined