[08:28] <kim0> Morning fellas
[14:44] <niemeyer> Good mornings!
[14:44] <hazmat_> niemeyer: g'morning
[14:45] <niemeyer> A bit late today.. broke my glasses over the weekend, and had to run to try getting new ones before the trip :-(
[14:45] <hazmat_> niemeyer: i pushed an old branch of txzk into review, i realized i needed it for some of the connection level error handling in the subsequent session branch
[14:45] <niemeyer> hazmat_: Sounds good.. will do another pass in the queue today
[14:46] <hazmat_> niemeyer: that sucks, i finally broke down and got a new pair (my last pair was being held together by electrical tape..)
[14:46] <niemeyer> hazmat_: Ouch :)
[14:46] <niemeyer> hazmat_: I'm tempted to get an extra pair
[14:46] <niemeyer> hazmat_: Btw, there were several things pending there on Friday in the review queue.  Would be good to have a pass there if you find a moment.
[14:47] <hazmat_> niemeyer: sure
[14:51] <_mup_> txzookeeper/session-event-handling r46 committed by kapil.foss@gmail.com
[14:51] <_mup_> - merge swap-sync-errors-to-failures
[14:51] <_mup_> - allow for connection error handler to return a deferred, whose result will be chained
[14:51] <_mup_>   to the api deferred.
[15:51] <_mup_> txzookeeper/session-event-handling r47 committed by kapil.foss@gmail.com
[15:51] <_mup_> Improve connection error handler to api call result chaining.
[16:51] <niemeyer> hazmat_: session-event-handling mentions a pre-requisite branch which doesn't seem to be in review
[16:53] <hazmat_> niemeyer: it is in review in txzookeeper
[16:53] <hazmat_> niemeyer: its not visible in the ensemble kanban
[16:53] <hazmat_> niemeyer: the mp for session-event-handling has a link
[16:53] <niemeyer> hazmat_: Should it be to enable others to more easily pick it up as well?
[16:55] <hazmat_> niemeyer: i can add a cross linked bug for it, if that's helpful
[16:56] <niemeyer> hazmat_: Either that or we can harass someone directly to look at it :-)
[16:56] <hazmat_> niemeyer: i was going for the later ;-)
[16:56] <niemeyer> hazmat_: Sounds good too
[16:57] <hazmat_> off to see a man about a new car, bbiab
[16:57] <niemeyer> I'll have lunch now too..
[16:57] <niemeyer> Will go through the branches after it
[16:57] <niemeyer> biab
[17:30] <SpamapS> niemeyer: so, re the man page.. I think you're right. While I was writing the man page manually, I kept thinking this should probably be in the online help, and just auto-generated into the man page.
[17:31] <SpamapS> niemeyer: I'll take a look at doing just that.
[17:34] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Ah, manually generated would work wonderfully too!
[17:34] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Erm
[17:34] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Ah, automatically generated would work wonderfully too!
[17:34]  * niemeyer takes his pills
[17:46] <niemeyer> "
[17:46] <niemeyer> AWS CloudFormation enables system administrators 
[17:46] <niemeyer> and developers to create repeatable AWS 
[17:46] <niemeyer> infrastructure deployments (Stacks) using 
[17:46] <niemeyer> customizable architecture templates."
[17:47] <niemeyer> Sounds like we picked the right term for the concept.. (stacks) :-)
[17:48] <SpamapS> yeah
[17:48] <SpamapS> is there a draft spec for that yet?
[17:52] <niemeyer> SpamapS: No, just evolving over conversations for now
[17:56] <_mup_> ensemble/debug-log-relation-settings-changes r266 committed by jim.baker@canonical.com
[17:56] <_mup_> Doc strings, better total ordering on YAMLState item changes when logged
[18:01] <m_3> the cloudformation example templates use amazon
[18:01] <m_3> 's distribution
[18:03] <SpamapS> m_3: indeed, cloudformation is pretty much built around amazon's distro
[18:05] <m_3> SpamapS: the events seem to be the template's responsibility... http://paste.ubuntu.com/629916/
[18:08] <SpamapS> m_3: yeah, another hacky thing just like running chef from one cookbook on another host.
[18:14] <_mup_> ensemble/debug-log-relation-settings-changes r267 committed by jim.baker@canonical.com
[18:14] <_mup_> Verify representation of change items
[18:14] <negronjl> SpamapS:  https://bugs.launchpad.net/principia/+bug/799837 ( tomcat / no clustering )
[18:14] <_mup_> Bug #799837: new-formula ( tomcat6 ) <new-formula> <Principia Ensemble:New> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/799837 >
[18:15] <negronjl> SpamapS:  I have to do some other work for now but, will work on tomcat clustering when I get a chance.
[18:15] <SpamapS> negronjl: ok.. yeah I have some other stuff that has been neglected.. will take a look later today.
[18:16] <negronjl> SpamapS:  I know you're just neglecting me. :)
[18:36] <_mup_> ensemble/debug-log-relation-settings-changes r268 committed by jim.baker@canonical.com
[18:36] <_mup_> Test flush directly to ensure it returns the change items
[18:42] <_mup_> ensemble/debug-log-relation-settings-changes r269 committed by jim.baker@canonical.com
[18:42] <_mup_> PEP8, fix misspelling
[19:29] <niemeyer> Anyone up for a quick review on this: https://code.launchpad.net/~kim0/ensemble/updating-faq/+merge/64679?
[19:33] <jimbaker`> niemeyer, taking a look
[19:39] <kim0> what's the purpose of tagging new formulas with "new-formula" ?
[19:41] <kim0> that's probably the only way today to locate formulas in foreign branches ?
[19:45] <SpamapS> kim0: so you can find them for review.
[19:45] <niemeyer> kim0: I don't think we've agreed to that convention
[19:45] <niemeyer> kim0: At least I didn't see it being mentioned
[19:45] <SpamapS> Its how I'm reviewing new formulas in principia. :)
[19:45] <SpamapS> its just a bug tag
[19:45] <niemeyer> SpamapS: It's nice to present convention suggestions in general
[19:45] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Otherwise you'll be the only one using it :)
[19:45] <SpamapS> niemeyer: I did, in my Principia wiki page
[19:46] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Heh
[19:46] <SpamapS> https://ensemble.ubuntu.com/Principia mentions it and did from the very first revision I think.
[19:47] <SpamapS> https://bugs.launchpad.net/principia/+bugs?field.tag=new-formula
[19:47] <SpamapS> Quite a list. :)
[19:47] <niemeyer> That's nice!
[19:48] <niemeyer> I heard Launchpad may get support for listing branches through the API as soon as next week
[19:48] <niemeyer> Which means we'll be able to evolve the remote repo support pretty soon
[19:48] <SpamapS> Sweet.. the mr solution I have now *sucks*. :)
[19:49] <jimbaker`> kim0, niemeyer - approved the FAQ branch
[19:49] <niemeyer> jimbaker`: Nothing will beat "deploy lp:~spamaps/formula" I guess :-)
[19:49] <niemeyer> Oops
[19:49] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Nothing will beat "deploy lp:~spamaps/formula" I guess :-)
[19:50] <SpamapS> niemeyer: and even better will just be the ability to not pull down all of the formulas in order to have a chance at automatic dependency resolution.
[19:51] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Ah, definitely
[19:51] <niemeyer> SpamapS: This will be the next step
[19:52] <SpamapS> or even stepping back further, forget the dependencies, just a 'ensemble search tomcat' and have it show you the available formulas.. very useful.
[19:54] <niemeyer> jimbaker`: Thanks.  Can you please please merge it then?
[19:54] <niemeyer> Erm
[19:54] <niemeyer> s/please please/please/ :)
[19:54] <jimbaker`> kim0, also according to wikipedia (can we really say that? someone else at least...), it should apparently "at run time" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_time)
[19:54] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Ah, that'll be awesome indeed
[19:54] <jimbaker`> niemeyer, good to know it's not so urgent ;)
[19:55] <niemeyer> SpamapS: Or "info tomcat"
[19:55] <niemeyer> jimbaker`: Hehe :)
[19:55] <niemeyer> jimbaker`: Brain hiccup
[19:55] <jimbaker`> niemeyer, ok, i will make the fixes we both recommended
[19:55] <niemeyer> jimbaker`: I think he already handled my review
[19:55] <niemeyer> kim0: Right?
[19:57] <jimbaker`> niemeyer, kim0 applied the changes you requested
[19:58]  * kim0 reading .. catching up
[19:58] <jimbaker`> niemeyer, i can take care of the minor fixes i suggested
[19:58] <niemeyer> jimbaker`: Sweet, thanks
[19:58] <jimbaker`> or kim0, since you're here, maybe easier process from a branch history perspective if you just do it :)
[20:00] <kim0> jimbaker`: okie, applying your comments .. thanks for the review :)
[20:03] <kim0> jimbaker`: hmm, is there a smart way to reference your merge proposal comments, in my commit message?
[20:05] <jimbaker`> kim0, i'm not aware of being able to link this in at the commit level
[20:05] <jimbaker`> kim0, but our usual practice is to always reply to each comment, if only with an "ack"
[20:06] <kim0> jimbaker`: updates pushed .. can I do the merge?
[20:06] <jimbaker`> kim0, i personally find that if i do that, the chance that i inadvertently let a review comment slide w/o action goes way down
[20:06] <jimbaker`> kim0, hey, if you are able to do so, i will certainly let you merge :), but otherwise i can readily do it
[20:07]  * kim0 takes a shot
[20:16] <kim0> merged