Not sure if it counts as a bug or not, but some per-site metas can be the parent sites of chatrooms.

This room is a living example, where the parent site is MathOverflow meta. Here is a beautiful screenshot:

10 meta sites are selectable as the parent site, 2 of which are beta sites. As choosing them as parent sites is pretty meaningless, I'm guessing this is a bug.

  • Note that I'm not talking about meta.SE chats which have their own domain. – M.A.R. Mar 24 '16 at 8:40
  • I disagree that this is a bug. I can imagine situations where this can be useful. (For example, separating chat rooms related to site maintenance from the chat rooms related to discussions about the subject.) But it is definitely no big deal, I can live with this being resolved one way or another.) – Martin Mar 25 '16 at 8:17
  • @Martin the end result of this post was that meta chats also appear in the site's chatrooms list. Do you somehow disagree with that? (Hard to tell what this refers to in your comment, since another issue is resolved in this thread, not what was sought in the post itself) – M.A.R. Mar 25 '16 at 14:33
  • This refers to this question. You asked why metas can have associated chat rooms and tagged it as (bug). So my comment was to say that I do not thing it is a bug. However, you said yourself that you are not sure it counts as a bug. – Martin Mar 25 '16 at 16:25

Edit: change applied re comment; site-based room filtering is now automatically expanded to cover both foo and meta.foo. You can't hide by using meta! Visually:

enter image description here


An equal question might be: why can't or shouldn't meta sites have specific chat? The "10" isn't a problem with those 10 sites - it is simply that we limit the picker to the first 10 matches. We do that even for an empty filter (so it shows "3D Printing" thru "Ask Different").

As a side note, historically the main "meta" was "meta.stackoverflow.com", so the system had to support at least that, but... I simply can't find a reason to disallow it or consider them any differently than I would main Q+A sites.

  • 1
    Then maybe it should be another request to show them in the site's chatrooms' list too? Since meta is some kind of dependent on the main site, chat should work that way too. (I'm saying this 'cause a chat on meta.MO doesn't appear in the list of MO chatrooms) – M.A.R. Mar 24 '16 at 11:21
  • @IͶΔ that's a fair observation... try now - better? – Marc Gravell Mar 24 '16 at 12:05
  • Ooh nice. Thanks – M.A.R. Mar 24 '16 at 12:22
  • @MarcGravell Wow, impressively quick response to that [feature-request]! – Rand al'Thor Mar 25 '16 at 2:29
  • @MarcGravell Does this mean that they will also be shown in the sidebar? – Martin Mar 25 '16 at 8:14
  • And another natural follow-up question. Does this influence room-pruning? Is it still true that, for example, at least one of the rooms associated with meta.math.SE and at least one of the room associated with math.SE will not be frozen, even if there is no message for 14 days? – Martin Mar 25 '16 at 18:01
  • 1
    @Martin no change was made there – Marc Gravell Mar 25 '16 at 22:45
  • 1
    @MarcGravell Thanks for the response! Your last comment is about chatroom-pruning right? (I suppose that the sidebar thing changed as a consequence of this. At least the first time I have notice meta-chatroom in the sidebar was after this change.) – Martin Mar 26 '16 at 7:25
  • 1
    This feature seems to have broken recently (and also), maybe something with the HTTPS-related meta domain name changes? – Jason C Mar 23 '17 at 3:59
  • @Jason thanks, I'll check into that – Marc Gravell Mar 23 '17 at 7:36

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .