[00:44:06] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> Please no (re @Ege: So what's the current policy about substituting strings for integers? I'm asking because I saw the function Z10599
[00:44:07] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> 
[00:44:09] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> I have some ...)
[00:45:20] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> But if you do, I liked Mahir's very obvious naming scheme. Especially please don't use them for compositions.
[00:47:45] <wm-bb>	 <Ege> Okay, thank you :› I'll probably stick to string(s) to string or string(s) to boolean for now
[00:56:41] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> Thanks!
[03:37:56] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> Or do we want tests to never be used on multiple functions? It seemed like it would be a way forward as they are also stored as objects. (re @Jan_ainali: But we don't need to delete it completely, because it is going to be used on another function)
[07:31:14] <wm-bb>	 <iamsabas> @Ameisenigel I saw you removed the team from T344038, is this something you don't want to follow up?
[07:42:22] <taavi>	 iamsabas: team tags should be added as projects, not subscribers
[07:58:02] <wm-bb>	 <Ameisenigel> Yeah, I just removed it as subscriber. It is still there as project.
[08:00:14] <wm-bb>	 <iamsabas> thanks! what's the correct way to respond to that ticket? should I do something?
[08:12:33] <wm-bb>	 <Ameisenigel> You can just comment directly in the ticket if you want to
[09:33:09] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> I'm really not sure that the same test for several functions is something that would be useful frequently enough to support it. But I can be swayed. (re @Jan_ainali: Or do we want tests to never be used on multiple functions? It seemed like it would be a way forward as they are also stored as ...)
[09:36:05] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> I am not sure either. It was just a thought I got when I realized they are really existing separately from the function. (re @vrandecic: I'm really not sure that the same test for several functions is something that would be useful frequently enough to support it. ...)
[09:36:52] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> It feels like a big thing to do for a small gain...
[09:37:27] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> Is it that big? Just a button to connect them. (re @Nicolas: It feels like a big thing to do for a small gain...)
[09:39:13] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> I may be wrong but it feels quite big (and maintenance?)
[09:40:00] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> Maintenance may be the tricky thing, true. (re @Nicolas: I may be wrong but it feels quite big (and maintenance?))
[09:41:05] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> So if we are not reusing them, then the possibility to remove them is not needed as they can just be deleted.
[11:09:26] <wm-bb>	 <Ameisenigel> I just file T344332 for this (re @Ameisenigel: Do we really want that deleted ZIDs can be reused or should this be prevented like on Wikidata?)
[12:14:16] <wm-bb>	 <Sannita> Thanks for doing that, I actually support this (re @Ameisenigel: I just filed T344332 for this)