jimbakerhazmat, because the reverse diff i did against trunk to recover from lbox submit destroyed history, i'm going to propose branches again as new branches00:10
jimbakerunfortunately recovering from destroyed history is unfortunate00:22
hazmatjimbaker, huh?00:36
hazmatdestroyed history?00:36
hazmatwhen you merged trunk back to your local branch00:36
hazmatyou just reapply a reverse to your local branch00:36
jimbakerhazmat, please take a look at trunk r501 then 50200:36
hazmatjimbaker, you merged and then reverted00:37
jimbakerhazmat, i have not yet merged trunk to the local branch00:37
jimbakerthat is, my relation-id branch00:37
jimbakerbut i'm not getting proper ancestor diffs against it00:38
jimbakerhazmat, so "destroyed" may be the wrong term, but it's certainly not readily usable00:38
hazmatjimbaker, generate a diff of your branch to the previous version of trunk 50000:39
hazmatmerge trunk00:39
hazmatreapply diff00:39
hazmat to your branch00:39
hazmatyou will lose some of the history on your branch00:39
hazmatwell as you say not lose, but garble00:39
hazmatbut you'll have proper diffs00:40
hazmatand won't lose any work00:40
hazmatjimbaker, how's the rel-id work coming outside of that?00:41
jimbakerhazmat, is it reasonable that bzr diff -r ancestor:../../trunk produces an empty result?00:41
jimbakerhazmat, it is done00:41
hazmatjimbaker, can you push your latest.. i'll play around with it00:42
jimbakerhazmat, thanks00:42
jimbakerhazmat, it is pushed00:42
jimbakeri will push the other 3 branches too. they are also complete00:42
jimbakerin terms of responding to all reviews00:43
hazmatjimbaker, have you lbox propose -cr them?00:44
jimbakerhazmat, previously00:44
jimbakerhazmat, all branches have been pushed00:44
hazmatjimbaker, they should get reproposed if their not approved00:45
* hazmat looks at rel-id00:45
jimbakerhazmat, should i use lbox propose -cr? previously we discussed using lbox submit00:45
jimbakerfor this purpose00:45
jimbakerhazmat, i will be back in about 1 hour, kids need to eat dinner00:49
hazmatjimbaker, lbox submit merges00:49
hazmatjimbaker, when was that?00:51
hazmatjimbaker, here's a diff of your branch against r500 http://paste.ubuntu.com/906490/00:51
hazmatyou can merge trunk and reapply the diff, there's 4 conflicted files00:52
hazmatthat need manual attention00:52
hazmatjimbaker, please submit rel-id for review again after you've merged trunk and reapplied the diff, i'd like to double check the merge00:53
TheMuerogpeppe: morning09:23
rogpeppeTheMue: hiya09:24
TheMuerogpeppe: just proposed the new config watch, looks nice09:24
TheMuerogpeppe: now i'm off for some hours, family needs me09:24
rogpeppeTheMue: i don't see any email09:24
rogpeppeTheMue: have you got a codereview link?09:25
TheMuerogpeppe: strange, google lags ;)09:25
rogpeppeTheMue: ok, see you later09:25
rogpeppeTheMue: i refreshed too09:25
TheMuerogpeppe: https://codereview.appspot.com/5885059/09:26
rogpeppeTheMue: thanks09:26
fwereade_hazmat, btw, did you ever resolve the can't-actually-bootstrap-with-constraints problem you saw yesterday?13:28
hazmatfwereade_, no.. i'm not able to bootstrap on ec2 with warned-ignore-constraint branch13:45
hazmatfwereade_, it looks like some app failures13:46
fwereade_hazmat, bah... and it's definitely neither a juju-origin nor a PYTHONPATH problem?13:46
fwereade_hazmat, sorry, "app failures"?13:46
hazmatfwereade_, er.. apt13:46
fwereade_hazmat, huh, weird... I don't think I changed anything related to that13:47
fwereade_hazmat, wasn't niemeyer talking to you about having some problem like that himself the other day?13:48
hazmatfwereade_, i'm able to deploy envs with trunk without issue13:48
fwereade_hazmat, ++weird13:49
hazmathmm.. pythonpath..13:49
hazmatthat was in a virtualenv.. indeed13:49
* hazmat tries again13:50
hazmatfwereade_, yeah.. looking over the cloud-init on the instance i don't see the constraints so that is  likely the issue.. user error ;-)13:50
* fwereade_ looks relieved13:51
hazmatfwereade_, hm.. even with the correct branch its hanging14:16
hazmatalthough its not clear that this problem has anything to do with the branch14:16
fwereade_hazmat, do you know what's hanging? could it just be a grumpy EC2?14:16
hazmatvs. an apt or repo issue14:16
hazmatfwereade_, its failing doing a package install14:17
fwereade_hazmat, ah ok14:17
fwereade_hazmat, do you know what package?14:17
fwereade_hazmat, (not that that's actually going to tell me anything useful I can think of...)14:17
hazmatfwereade_, hm. there are two..14:20
hazmatCalledProcessError: Command '['apt-get', '--option', 'Dpkg::Options::=--force-confold', '--assume-yes', 'update']' returned non-zero exit status 10014:20
hazmatbzr: ERROR: Invalid url supplied to transport: "bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/~fwereade/juju/warn-ignored-constraint": no supported schemes14:21
fwereade_hazmat, huh, never seen anything like those before :(14:21
hazmatfwereade_, also happens on trunk :-(14:27
fwereade_hazmat, ha, that's one of those things that would be a relief if it weren't an "OH CRAP"14:27
hazmatfwereade_, indeed :-)14:27
hazmatfwereade_, the repo issue is being looked into by ben and scott, its something their aware of14:49
hazmatthe bzr issue is odd as well14:49
fwereade_hazmat, http://search.dilbert.com/comic/Actively%20Waiting14:50
fwereade_hazmat, bzr is very weird14:51
hazmatit feels like a regression of some sort14:51
hazmatfwereade_, oh..14:51
hazmatyour branch might be private14:51
hazmatthat would explain it14:51
hazmatfwereade_, yeah.. i can bzr branch lp:juju but not your branch..14:52
fwereade_hazmat, gaaah, sorry14:52
hazmatthat's just from the anon perspective.. that's odd though14:53
TheMuerogpeppe: next watcher version is in the box14:53
fwereade_hazmat, I've merged everything except the doc changes into shadow-trunk-1204; I'll go and peer at that on launchpad and see if I can figure out what to do14:53
rogpeppeTheMue: cool14:53
fwereade_hazmat, ...and hey, how did it ever work for me if that's the problem?14:53
hazmatfwereade_, good question14:54
rogpeppeTheMue: i've got the email this time. previous one must have been lost in transit sometime14:54
fwereade_hazmat, hey, it's "warn-ignored-constraints"14:54
fwereade_hazmat, your error message was missing the terminal s14:54
hazmatfwereade_, yeah.. i was just reading about the relevant bug14:54
hazmatbug 85471314:54
hazmatoh.. no mup here14:55
SpamapShazmat: am I reading the tea leaves correct that this is the final bit for subordinates: https://code.launchpad.net/~bcsaller/juju/subordinate-control-status/+merge/98088 ?14:55
fwereade_hazmat, icky :)14:55
hazmatSpamapS, there's one more branch out for subordinates in addition to that one14:56
hazmatthat branches pre-requisites have been merged though14:56
hazmatso just sub-status and sub-agent branches14:56
TheMuerogpeppe: at least the link worked and i got your helpful comments15:02
rogpeppeTheMue: LGTM (with a couple of minor comment issues)15:04
TheMuerogpeppe: thx15:05
rogpeppeTheMue: i'm very happy how this is starting to look15:06
TheMuerogpeppe: "observices"? oh no! seems like a bad mixture of observes and service.15:06
TheMuerogpeppe: *lol*15:06
TheMuerogpeppe: having a native speaker as lector is really helpful.15:10
TheMuerogpeppe: thx15:10
rogpeppeTheMue: np15:10
jimbakerhazmat, did you have a chance to look at the most recent relation id branches in rietveld (there are 4)? also thanks for helping me recover relation-id with respect to trunk!15:38
hazmatjimbaker, not yet, i haven't seen updated reitveld reviews for them outside of id15:39
hazmatjimbaker, http://codereview.appspot.com/user/jimbaker ic them here though. its helpful to actually use a description on these.15:40
jimbakerhazmat, np, i don't know why we have Issue 5900068: <please have a summary here>15:41
jimbakerit has a description, not just a summary - and i'm quite certain it had one in the editor. i'll see if i can change that15:42
jimbakerneed to work on lbox fu i suppose15:42
hazmatjimbaker, don't worry about it, i think your not supposed to edit it15:53
hazmatlbox may use it for sync with the mp15:53
hazmatat least the mp always says don't edit it15:53
jimbakerhazmat, ok... we will see how it works out. i hope it uses something besides text to link (since i did edit it!)15:54
hazmatno idea15:54
hazmatjimbaker, the src is only a lp:lbox away15:54
jimbakerhazmat, yeah, i will think about that ;)15:55
hazmatfwereade_, i think its probably good to merge the shadow branch and deal with the docs merge later16:08
hazmatfwereade_, docs reviewed16:30
hazmathmm.. looks like the sub-status/sub-agent are updated in reitveld yet16:32
* hazmat moves on to rel-id16:32
jimbakerhazmat, thanks16:32
fwereade_hazmat, sweet16:35
fwereade_hazmat, I'll make sure it's up to date, retest, and do a propose for form's sake16:36
hazmatfwereade_, sounds good, but are you sure your not just going for the biggest merge medal :-)16:47
fwereade_hazmat, heh, now I know there is one that's totally what I'm doing :p16:48
fwereade_hazmat, https://code.launchpad.net/~fwereade/juju/shadow-trunk-1204/+merge/10019516:56
fwereade_hazmat, it's only also on rietveld because I wanted to see what it looked like :p16:57
hazmatjimbaker, i'm seeing alot of errors running tests against the rel-id branch17:00
jimbakerhazmat, let me check that17:01
jimbaker(i ran test multiple times... but... let's see it run once more)17:01
hazmatjimbaker, i did a pull.. but it seems to be in the scheduler code..17:04
hazmat  File "/home/kapil/canonical/ensemble/jimbaker/relation-id/juju/hooks/scheduler.py", line 185, in __init__17:04
hazmat    self._relation_ident = relation_ident17:04
hazmatexceptions.NameError: global name 'relation_ident' is not defined17:04
* hazmat checks his branch for previous gymnastics causing foobar17:05
fwereade__eyup, he's got an off-brand file path there17:05
hazmatjimbaker, yeah.. sorry it was my gymnastics to get a good diff earlier that seem to have cause the issue17:05
hazmatfwereade__, sadly not they weren't cleanly relocatable17:06
hazmatpipelines end up recording fullpaths17:06
hazmati saved the juju one for golang ;-)17:06
fwereade__hazmat, haha, nice17:06
fwereade__hazmat, if you'd give me an ultra-quick form approval on that branch I'll submit before I go out17:06
jimbakerhazmat, it's running cleanly for me. quick check, on your diffstat are you getting 10 files changed, 201 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-) ?17:08
fwereade__hazmat, (not sure why, it feels wrong for me to do it myself)17:08
hazmatfwereade__, fair enough17:08
hazmatjimbaker, see above comments, it was caused from me generating the diff17:09
hazmattests are running fine now17:09
jimbakerhazmat, that's a relief17:09
* hazmat wonders if we can hit 2k tests b4 the release17:10
jimbakerhazmat, certainly getting close17:11
hazmatfwereade__, that's hillarious re actively waiting comic17:13
hazmatfwereade__, approved17:16
fwereade__hazmat, many thanks, submitting now17:17
hazmatjimbaker, rel-id looks good17:23
hazmatbcsaller, the sub-status and sub-agent need to be lbox proposed again if their ready for review17:23
* hazmat looks for some food, bbiab17:23
bcsallerhazmat: not quite ready17:24
jimbakerhazmat, thanks17:24
jimbakerhazmat, any more feedback on the other relation id branches?20:17
hazmatjimbaker, not yet20:28
jimbakerhazmat, ok20:28
wrtpniemeyer: how ok is gocheck with concurrency?21:33
niemeyerwrtp: In which regard?21:34
wrtpniemeyer: if a test runs a new goroutine that then does an Assert, what happens?21:34
wrtp(when the assert fails, that is)21:34
niemeyerwrtp: The same thing that with testing21:35
niemeyerwrtp: It'd attempt to panic such a goroutine, which would cause bad things to happen21:35
wrtpniemeyer: i don't know the situation with testing actually.21:35
niemeyerwrtp: It's ok with concurrency, but the panic-on-unknown-goroutine is a hard one to handle21:35
wrtpniemeyer: ah, it throws a panic rather than using runtime.Goexit() ?21:35
niemeyerwrtp: It uses Goexit actually, for now, but still it's not g21:36
wrtpniemeyer: i think that would probably work ok21:36
wrtpniemeyer: for me anyway21:36
niemeyerwrtp: It continues running, and which invalidates the point of using assert21:36
wrtpniemeyer: i can have a chan in the goroutine that gets closed when the goroutine goexits21:37
wrtpniemeyer: hmm, what happens if you get two asserts that fail? does it mind?21:37
niemeyerwrtp: it doesn't mind, but I'll probably mind having to maintain that logic :)21:38
niemeyerwrtp: Just do something usual21:38
wrtpniemeyer: the alternative is to pass errors back down a channel21:38
niemeyerwrtp: Sounds fine21:38
wrtpniemeyer: which might be the best course. i just wondered if it might be reasonable to use assert.21:38
wrtpniemeyer: it would read well, i think.21:39
wrtpniemeyer: by not using Assert, i lose the context for the error, which is a pity.21:40
niemeyerwrtp: You can error there21:41
niemeyerwrtp: Error, I mean21:41
niemeyerwrtp: or Check, in that case21:41
wrtpniemeyer: yeah, Check would make things more obvious, i guess21:41
wrtpalthough: c.Assert(err, IsNil) isn't quite as nice as if !c.Check(err, IsNil) { return }21:43
wrtpniemeyer: if you think of each new goroutine as a new test, the TestFoo function as a kind of "main", and the result being the boolean OR of all the test results before TestFoo returns, it makes quite a bit of sense actually.21:51
wrtpniemeyer: it scales to goroutines quite nicely.21:51
niemeyerwrtp: I don't think of each goroutine as a new test21:51
wrtpniemeyer: i'm thinking of them a sub-tests21:52
wrtps/ a / as /21:52
niemeyerwrtp: c.Assert == t.Fatal if it fails.. a fatal that isn't fatal is bogus21:53
wrtpniemeyer: fatal to what?21:53
niemeyerwrtp: t.Fatal21:53
wrtpwhat's t.Fatal?21:53
niemeyerwrtp: Please check out the testing package21:54
wrtpi know that Fatal, ok21:54
wrtpbut again, fatal to what? what's dying? the test has multiple pieces that can die individually21:55
wrtpniemeyer: i think it works quite well to think of it that way. it means that tests can scale up to concurrency well.21:56
niemeyerwrtp: Please actually do read the docs21:56
niemeyerwrtp: That's not what Fatal or Assert means, and I'm not keen on changing their meaning21:57
wrtpniemeyer: yeah, FailNow could do with an updated doc. "FailNow marks the function as having failed and stops its execution. Execution will continue at the next test or benchmark when the original Test function finishes"21:58
wrtpniemeyer: it would be nice if Fatal/FailNow/Assert could have a useful meaning in a concurrent test21:58
wrtpniemeyer: here's a flavour of how the two approaches look side by side: http://paste.ubuntu.com/907926/22:07
wrtpniemeyer: ah! i can define my own assert that calls Check and Goexits if it fails.22:18
niemeyerwrtp: I'd rather have it inlined in the test, and simple22:57
wrtpniemeyer: it is simpler as an assert - not as much control structure to get right.22:58
niemeyerI'm heading off for dinner.. laters all, or see you all on Monday22:58
wrtpniemeyer: see you in 10 days!23:01
wrtpniemeyer: have a good week.23:01
wrtphave a great Easter, everyone23:04
wrtpsee you in a bit23:04

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!