| rogpeppe | fwereade_: morning! | 07:38 |
|---|---|---|
| TheMue | Morning | 08:52 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: hiyta | 08:58 |
| rogpeppe | hiya | 08:58 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: I'm now returning a more detailed error containing the stderr output. | 08:59 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: cool | 08:59 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Could you take a look again? | 09:00 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: yeah, in a little bit | 09:00 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Thx. | 09:00 |
| === TheMue_ is now known as TheMue | ||
| * rogpeppe loves it when he starts implementing something, then realises it's unexpectedly done already, as a natural consequence of earlier changes. | 10:33 | |
| rogpeppe | davecheney, dimitern: hiya | 10:33 |
| davecheney | rehowdy | 10:35 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: hey | 10:38 |
| TheMue | davecheney, dimitern: Morning. | 10:39 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Any chance to take a look? | 10:41 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: sorry, i'm on a roll this morning - i don't want to derail for the moment, sorry | 10:41 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: OK | 10:42 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: i'll take a look after i've dealt with this branch | 10:42 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Would be great, thank you. | 10:42 |
| dimitern | TheMue: morning | 10:52 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: you've got a review | 10:58 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Thx | 10:58 |
| dimitern | wallyworld: mgz and me are on mumble | 11:01 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Read it and the first two points are relative simple, ok. But the multi-line stderr is indeed a problem. I don't know if it should be part of the one-liner error string. For those who wnat to use it it's in the error as a field. | 11:02 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: i know. there's no easy answer i'm afraid, but i'm not sure it's right as is. | 11:02 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: (and i've seen lxc print multi-line error messages, so i know it definitely is an issue) | 11:03 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: My problem also is, that the scope of that CL moved. The intention has been to add "first tests" to extend it later. ;) | 11:04 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: i think the error handling is rightly part of the first tests | 11:04 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade_: ping | 12:03 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Aaargh, found an interesting behavior. The error message of lxc is written to stdout, not stderr. Will change the code according, os/exec supports it. | 12:06 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: ha. | 12:06 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: it depends on the command maybe | 12:07 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: the command i tried printed it to stderr | 12:07 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: which command did you try? | 12:07 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Yes, maybe. Strange. But I should get it with the combined output. | 12:08 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: I took lxc-create | 12:08 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: the problem is that some commands might print an error *and* some expected standard output | 12:09 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: lxc-start prints to stderr... | 12:09 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: yuck | 12:09 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: and lxc-create doesn't prefix its error lines either | 12:10 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: I'll find my way. So far I already test most stuff before I even start a command and I'll add a root check too. ;) | 12:10 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Yes, that's what Aram said, it's inconsistent. | 12:10 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: yeah, it's badly done | 12:10 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: perhaps we should file a bug report | 12:11 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: I'll make a note, yes. | 12:11 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: i think there might be a pattern. i suspect that the lxc commands that are shell scripts print errors to stdout; the ones that aren't print errors to stderr | 12:12 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: and their errors are totally inconsistent too. check out this one: | 12:13 |
| rogpeppe | echo "E: lxc-info - no such file" >&2 | 12:13 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: I just take all output for debugging, additionally to the returned ExecError of exec.Command | 12:15 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: yeah, i don't think there's much else you can do actually | 12:15 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: even some of the commands that are expected to produce stuff to stdout still print their errors to stdout. | 12:16 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: what a friggin' mess. i don't think people know how to use shell scripts any more. | 12:16 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Hehe, yep. | 12:17 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3589389&group_id=163076&atid=826303 | 12:33 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Great | 12:33 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Thx, I would have done it later. ;) | 12:34 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: it annoyed me enough that i wanted to do it there and then :-) | 12:34 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: You're using it @home? | 12:34 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: no, just the principle of it :-) | 12:35 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Hehe :D | 12:35 |
| TheMue | lunchtime, brb | 12:51 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: yo! | 13:01 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i'm just passing the ca-cert to jujud, and i'm not quite sure of the best way to do it. i could use a flag or a file. | 13:02 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Heya | 13:02 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i've just done it as a flag, but i'm not sure that's right. | 13:02 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I'm not quite sure either.. it should be a file | 13:02 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: But we could pass as a flag, or hardcode the path | 13:03 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: currently my best thought is to hard-code the path (inside datadir) | 13:03 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: the flag is awkward because i'm not sure how the upstart config copes with multi-line strings | 13:04 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: ah, you mean pass the filename as a flag | 13:05 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: that could be better actually (and marginally easier to test, possibly) | 13:05 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i think i'll go with that for the time being. | 13:06 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Sounds good | 13:07 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: this branch might finally be ok now, i'm hoping: https://codereview.appspot.com/6850087/ | 13:12 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: and i'm hoping this one too: https://codereview.appspot.com/6855054/ | 13:13 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Cool, I'll be there son | 13:15 |
| niemeyer | soon | 13:15 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: "son" works too, in a slightly patronising kinda way :-) | 13:16 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: So, changes are in. | 13:47 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: ok | 13:47 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: reviewed | 14:03 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Great, thank you. | 14:03 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Closer, review sent | 14:16 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: quick crack test: is what i'm doing in TestPackage here ok, or crackful? the alternative is to add something in every SetUpSuite. https://codereview.appspot.com/6842088/diff/1/cmd/jujud/main_test.go | 14:16 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: thanks | 14:16 |
| rogpeppe | "What if the path is != "" and m[attr] is nil, shouldn't it stay nil?" | 14:18 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i don't *think* so | 14:18 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i deliberately chose that behaviour | 14:18 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: to follow the documentation | 14:18 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: in particular "The ...-path key is translated into "..." by loading the content from the respective file" | 14:20 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i thought that meant that it's best to honour the path value if it's set | 14:21 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: note that providing a nil value still prevents it from "reading the standard paths" | 14:22 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I'm not sure I see what you're trying to achieve | 14:31 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I thought you had suggested yesterday that it shouldn't change if it's nil? | 14:32 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i'm trying to come up with something that's not too surprising to someone that reads the docs on New() | 14:32 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: path always overrides value | 14:32 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: (currently) | 14:32 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: if you've explicitly specified a path, i think it would be surprising if it was ignored | 14:32 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Okay | 14:33 |
| niemeyer | I'll get a quick lunch | 14:41 |
| mgz | dimitern: can I bother you for a review of the swift fixup stuff? | 14:43 |
| * rogpeppe should probably get lunch too | 14:43 | |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: PTAL https://codereview.appspot.com/6850087 | 14:44 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i'm seeing an openstack test failure in trunk | 14:56 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1379598/ | 14:56 |
| * dimitern looks | 14:56 | |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: hmm.. strange, why didn't it fail before when I run the test.. | 14:57 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i know not | 14:57 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: it's a trivial fix, I'm on it | 14:58 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: it might be possible that you're relying on map-traversal order | 14:58 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: (which is random) | 14:58 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: maybe, anyway it was the last change | 14:59 |
| mgz | reminds me, I should actually get the juju-core suite passing here | 14:59 |
| mgz | it was unhappy last time I ran it | 14:59 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: when you have a test failure, pastebin it, and i'll let you know if it's a common one or not | 15:02 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: there are still a few sporadic test failures | 15:02 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: mostly to do with unreliability of external components, i think | 15:02 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: strange, I cannot see the openstack provider code at all in trunk | 15:03 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: that's odd | 15:03 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: it should be there, right? it was yesterday | 15:04 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i see it | 15:04 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: what do the last few entries of the revision log look like? | 15:04 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: well, problem #0 is what command to use to run the tests, and problem #1 is what I think I should use runs some, but then has: | 15:05 |
| mgz | go build launchpad.net/juju-core/cmd/juju: signal 9 | 15:05 |
| mgz | FAIL launchpad.net/juju-core/cmd/juju [build failed] | 15:05 |
| mgz | which seems non-passy | 15:05 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: well, mostly yours - up to rev 734 | 15:05 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: to run all the tests, go to the juju-core root dir, and type "go test ./..." | 15:05 |
| mgz | okay, so that is the convention. any ideas on the build fail? | 15:06 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: and doing either bzr up or bzr pull does not get me anything new | 15:06 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: trunk is up to revision 737 | 15:07 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: what does bzr info print? | 15:07 |
| mgz | dimitern: are you in the right branch, and what's the parent?... what rogpeppe said | 15:07 |
| * rogpeppe really goes for some lunch now | 15:08 | |
| dimitern | mgz: I'm at the master branch (as cobzr names trunk) | 15:08 |
| dimitern | dimitern@kubrik:~/work/juju-core$ bzr up | 15:09 |
| dimitern | Tree is up to date at revision 734 of branch /home/dimitern/work/go/src/launchpad.net/juju-core/.bzr/cobzr/master | 15:09 |
| dimitern | dimitern@kubrik:~/work/juju-core$ bzr pull | 15:09 |
| dimitern | Using saved parent location: /home/dimitern/work/go/src/launchpad.net/juju-core/ | 15:09 |
| dimitern | No revisions or tags to pull. | 15:09 |
| mgz | okay, so that's the problem | 15:09 |
| dimitern | mgz: what? | 15:09 |
| mgz | the parent branch is a local mirror, not lp:juju | 15:10 |
| mgz | *lp:juju-core | 15:10 |
| dimitern | mgz: I see, so how to change that? | 15:10 |
| mgz | use `bzr pull --remember lp:juju-core` | 15:10 |
| dimitern | mgz: nice, 10x | 15:10 |
| dimitern | mgz, rogpeppe: PTAL https://codereview.appspot.com/6843109 | 15:19 |
| mgz | dimitern: I still get failures on those tests, but from a different issue | 15:25 |
| dimitern | mgz: can I see the paste? | 15:26 |
| dimitern | I don't get any errors, and I run the tests like 30 times in a row | 15:26 |
| mgz | it's likely because this box is set up differently to yours, and the tests are not well isolated from home | 15:26 |
| mgz | so, specifically there are no keys in ~/.ssh | 15:27 |
| dimitern | mgz: so it's just happening on yours | 15:27 |
| mgz | and your test stuff doesn't pass authorized-keys or similar | 15:27 |
| dimitern | no, it's not at all to do with ssh | 15:28 |
| mgz | the failures I'm seeing :) | 15:28 |
| dimitern | mgz: got you :) so not in the OS provider tests | 15:28 |
| mgz | yes, those tests, but different failures from the one you're fixing | 15:29 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: LGTM | 15:29 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: YAY! | 15:30 |
| dimitern | mgz: can I still see the paste? | 15:30 |
| mgz | when pastebin starts responding... | 15:31 |
| mgz | http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/1379685/ | 15:31 |
| dimitern | :) | 15:31 |
| dimitern | mgz: I see, but that's from environs/config or something beneath | 15:32 |
| hazmat | rogpeppe, re the cert work, how does the client know the endpoint / cert fingerprint is valid for the endpoint? | 15:33 |
| rogpeppe | hazmat: the client has a CA public cert | 15:33 |
| mgz | full run with some failures from outside the openstack dir: | 15:33 |
| mgz | http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/1379695/ | 15:33 |
| rogpeppe | hazmat: i'm not sure how that works from a web-browser perspective | 15:33 |
| mgz | guess I'll fix up some of these | 15:34 |
| dimitern | mgz: so put an ssh pubkey then :) | 15:34 |
| hazmat | rogpeppe, k, but where is the private cert for the CA? | 15:34 |
| mgz | dimitern: if the test is loading stuff from your homedir to work, it's not a very good test | 15:34 |
| mgz | tests should pass on a clean box, not just are carefully set up development environment | 15:35 |
| dimitern | mgz: i agree, sure, so which test is actually the root cause? | 15:36 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: until recently there have been a few tests like that. i've fixed them, hopefully in some of my latest branches | 15:36 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: any that still need reviewing/landing? | 15:36 |
| mgz | if so, point me at 'em | 15:36 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: yeah, quite a few | 15:36 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: take a look please: https://codereview.appspot.com/6843109 - since it's trivial one LGTM should suffice, right? | 15:36 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: look at the juju-core active reviews | 15:36 |
| mgz | dimitern: it's a general bad assumption | 15:37 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: will do | 15:37 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: will do, in a little while | 15:37 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: thanks | 15:37 |
| hazmat | rogpeppe, for the web we'll need to have a webserver with the same cert serve up the html so the browser user can ack it, the websocket is considered a subresource, and won't get loaded if the cert isn't already known to the browser. | 15:44 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: are there any fixes for these tests that aren't nacked by niemeyer? | 15:46 |
| niemeyer | brb | 15:47 |
| mgz | for what it's worth, bzr has a few different test classes, any test that's going to touch disk is given an isolated home directory to work in | 15:49 |
| mgz | and lp:~rogpeppe/juju-core/141-test-HOME-independence fixes failures. | 15:53 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: we've moved away from that branch. i've been fixing on a see-it-and-fix-it basis. | 15:59 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: tbh i'm juggling too many subtly interrelated branches at the moment - i can't remember what goes where! | 16:00 |
| rogpeppe | it'd be good to have a go-ahead for this trivial: https://codereview.appspot.com/6847091/ | 16:01 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: ^ | 16:01 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: and this followup: https://codereview.appspot.com/6782103 | 16:02 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: LGTRM | 16:05 |
| rogpeppe | LGTM | 16:05 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: one LGTM is fine for that | 16:05 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: cool, 10x | 16:06 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: if you submit now, i've got two branches that i need to submit in quick succession | 16:06 |
| rogpeppe | pwd | 16:07 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: just submitted | 16:07 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: thanks | 16:08 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue, fwereade_, dimitern: please don't submit anything for a minute or so | 16:08 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe Ey, ey | 16:09 |
| dimitern | how does submitting interfere, i'm curious when you're done | 16:09 |
| * TheMue leaves now, has a whisky tasting in 50 minutes | 16:09 | |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: enjoy! | 16:11 |
| TheMue | I wish you all a wonderful weekend and thanks for the helpful feedback. | 16:11 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: I'll do. Slàinte! | 16:11 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: np. thanks for going along! | 16:11 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: done now. | 16:11 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: submitting pulls down a copy of the branch you're submitting against, merges against that, then pushes | 16:12 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: so if someone submits in the meantime, you may get a "branches diverged" error | 16:12 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: I see, good to know | 16:13 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: and in this case, one of the branches was breaking trunk, so i didn't want to get into that state | 16:13 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: i'm just putting together a branch that fixes the various HOME-dependencies | 16:18 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: ace, will look at those other movey branches too | 16:19 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: oh dear, it look like Settings.Write doesn't work properly in the face of nil keys. i only discovered when running the tests having done "chmod 0 ~/.ssh ~/.juju" | 16:42 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Hmm | 16:43 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: am currently working on a fix | 16:43 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: What's the deal there? | 16:43 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: the nil keys are disappearing | 16:43 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: sorry, the nil values | 16:43 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: it looks ok at a glance, but that's not what i'm seeing | 16:45 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Hmm | 16:47 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: yeah, this test fails: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1379890/ | 16:48 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I think that's what we represent as lack of value | 16:50 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: maybe i should back out my submits | 16:50 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: again :-( | 16:51 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: What about using your prior idea of changing the behavior of "" | 16:52 |
| rogpeppe | aargh | 16:52 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Would that work? | 16:52 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: argh² | 16:52 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i believe it would :-) | 16:52 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I still don't think it's great, but we can't spend weeks on how to load a value from disk | 16:53 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i know | 16:53 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: we could change the behaviour of "" throughout - it's really just an implementation convenience | 16:53 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: No, let's please not cascade this further | 16:54 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Otherwise Monday we'll be talking about this again | 16:54 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: yup | 16:54 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i thought i might get tls actually working today too | 16:54 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: (i've got a branch that almost does) | 16:54 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Let's keep the current branch mostly unchanged, and try to just adapt the logic so it works with "" | 16:54 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: ok | 16:55 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: could you draft the doc comment for New while i fix the code? | 16:55 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I'm on it | 16:57 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: thanks | 16:58 |
| mgz | hm, is lgtm actually used as a magic string for anything? | 17:26 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: i don't believe we do that (the go core does, i think) | 17:26 |
| rogpeppe | pwd | 17:26 |
| mgz | ~ | 17:26 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: reviewed those movey branches | 17:38 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: thank you | 17:38 |
| mgz | the second one I trust you on the design of, I'd probably have made a cert object that had create and parse constructors and accessors for cert/private key, and made the code create one how they wanted before passing to bootstrap | 17:40 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I think the easiest for the moment is to just remove the second to last paragraph | 17:40 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: It turns out that everything else is still true | 17:41 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: ok. will have a look when i've got these pesky tests passing again | 17:41 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: We could try to explain, but it feels like it'll make it harder to read and understand than otherwise | 17:41 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: that sounds reasonable | 17:42 |
| niemeyer | fwereade_: I know you're on holiday, but you demonstrated interest in talking yesterday. In case you need me, I'm around, but no rush.. we can talk on Monday too | 18:05 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: https://codereview.appspot.com/6854088 | 18:09 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Looking | 18:09 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Uh, what happened to the rest? | 18:09 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: the rest? | 18:10 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I mean, the branch that was already in review? | 18:10 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: it got submitted | 18:10 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: before i realised the problem | 18:10 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Oh? | 18:10 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Ouch | 18:10 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Okay, hopefully that'll fix it.. looking | 18:10 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i was trying to fix another problem when i found out | 18:10 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: the above branch should fix your $HOME-dependency problems too | 18:11 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: i've run all tests successfully with: mkdir /tmp/x; chmod 0 /tmp/x; HOME=/tmp/x go test ./... | 18:11 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: apart from the state tests, which need a writable .ssh, because ssh *always* writes to your home directory, regardless of the setting of $HOME | 18:12 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: That change in file bootstrap.go feels bogus | 18:13 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I've been looking at the change that puts it back where it should be on every other branch | 18:13 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i think it might be because i'm using a different version of gofmt | 18:13 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i.e. the one in tip | 18:14 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: looking | 18:14 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Maybe, but we need to stabilize the situation | 18:14 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I've seen *several* branches fixing this | 18:14 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: We shouldn't change it back | 18:14 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Or we'll continue to see it | 18:14 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: yeah. i'll put 1.0.3's version in my bin | 18:14 |
| rogpeppe | pwd | 18:14 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: In state_test.go, it's curious that a few lines were not there before | 18:15 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: THey weren't nil, and now they're being set to "" | 18:15 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: That means the behavior of the test is actually changing rather than just being moved on the nil/"" situation | 18:15 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Was the test borked? | 18:15 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: the test was relying on the fact that ca-private-key did not exist in $home/.juju, yeah | 18:16 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i smoked out these things by running the tests with an inaccessible home | 18:17 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Cool | 18:24 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: So LGTM | 18:25 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: thanks | 18:25 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: The gofmt issue is the only detail worth changing before submit | 18:25 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i've done it | 18:25 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I wonder if that's an accident | 18:25 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I mean, the gofmt behavior change | 18:26 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: it doesn't look right | 18:26 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i agree | 18:26 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: We should report it.. hopefully it can be fixed before the next major | 18:27 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: submitted. | 18:27 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Thanks a lot | 18:27 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: davecheney says there are other gofmt changes coming | 18:27 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: in tip | 18:27 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Hmm | 18:27 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i think we should standardise on 1.0.3 | 18:27 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Not sure how that affects things.. it feels like an unintended bug | 18:27 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: (that might be caused by these other changes) | 18:28 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: until 1.1 is released | 18:28 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: lgtm | 18:28 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: ta. it's in. i'd like to know if that fixes your problems. | 18:28 |
| mgz | ah, I should have mentioned, most of the failures are gone | 18:29 |
| mgz | there's still the odd build thing, and I need to pull to get dimitern's fix | 18:29 |
| niemeyer | http://code.google.com/p/go/issues/detail?id=4428 | 18:30 |
| niemeyer | mgz: That's related to your comment on the branch too ^ | 18:30 |
| mgz | niemeyer: right, I saw the discussion here after hitting submit | 18:31 |
| mgz | right, that's it for me | 18:32 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: here's the branch that implements the --ca-cert-file flag: https://codereview.appspot.com/6842088 | 18:40 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i've gotta go now, but i'm really hoping you might be able to go through my active reviews before monday :-) it's feely pretty unwieldy atm, although getting that config branch in is a big weight off. | 18:41 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: thanks a lot for bearing with me with these large branches. i'm hoping that there won't be much more in the way of config changes for a while now... | 18:44 |
| rogpeppe | night all | 18:44 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Thanks a lot, and have a nice night and weekend | 18:54 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: and you | 19:16 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: hope your house decoration is going/has gone well | 19:17 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: It's pretty much done now.. today was the last day of furniture installation, and the cable/internet guys were around too to upgrade the network | 19:19 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Slightly less crappy bandwidth now, hopefully video will suck less on our meetings now | 19:20 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I can't handle that anymore, so I'm glad it's over | 19:20 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!