| === slank is now known as slank_away | ||
| rogpeppe | davecheney: ping | 07:49 |
|---|---|---|
| rogpeppe | mornin' all! | 07:49 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld_: you around? | 08:19 |
| aram | hello. | 10:18 |
| rogpeppe | aram, dimitern: hiya | 10:31 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe, aram: morning :) | 10:32 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: openstack tests are broken in trunk BTW, if you don't have OS_TENANT_NAME set | 10:32 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: hmm | 10:32 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: that's now or the branch I proposed yesterday? | 10:32 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: currently | 10:33 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: it would also be nice if the goose "required environment variable" error message printed the name of the required environment variable rather than the struct field name... | 10:34 |
| rogpeppe | "required environment variable not set for credentials attribute: TenantName" makes it look as if the required env var is $TenantName | 10:34 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: tell me about it :) I did it like that originally, but.. anyway I'll take a look | 10:35 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: fixed https://codereview.appspot.com/7196043 - this is trivial, if you think it's ok, I'll land it now | 10:51 |
| jam | mgz: poke | 10:51 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: LGTM. agreed trivial. | 10:52 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: 10x, submitting then | 10:52 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: how about looking at my bootstrap branch - https://codereview.appspot.com/7181046/ | 10:55 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: will do | 10:55 |
| mgz | jam: hey | 10:56 |
| jam | mgz: I had some questions about how to setup tarmac, and thought you might be good to bounce off for feedback. | 10:56 |
| jam | I think I have it up and running, and a small patch to handle some stuff I didn't realize. | 10:56 |
| jam | However, what branch do we want it to actually manage? | 10:56 |
| jam | (do we want to add it to ~gophers, and give it write access there, do we want a different team, a branch only accessble by goose-bot, ... ?) | 10:57 |
| jam | (I guess the next direct step is to add support for running juju-core tests before landing trunk code, but I'd like to answer the above first) | 10:59 |
| mgz | hm, the bzr-pqm way is to have the branch owned by the bot | 10:59 |
| jam | mgz: right | 10:59 |
| jam | the major downside is the "manual escape hatch" | 10:59 |
| mgz | but being able to get around it and commit anyway will probably be useful for now | 10:59 |
| jam | especially because of wanting to be able to land goose code and juju-core code concurrently | 10:59 |
| mgz | yup. | 11:00 |
| mgz | so, maybe we want a new team that the bot can be a member of to own the goose code | 11:01 |
| jam | I tend to be cautious, so giving it full '~gophers' access seemed a bit much, but it is also a fair amount of bookkeeping just to do goose. | 11:04 |
| mgz | yeah. | 11:04 |
| dimitern | jam: but isn't that like the other go projects? all owned by ~gophers? | 11:05 |
| jam | dimitern: sure, and all of us have the ability to push whatever we want to them. I'm hesitant to allow a bot the same access. | 11:07 |
| mgz | it's easy enough to make ~gophers a member of the group that owns goose trunk, we just don't want the bot to have too much power :) | 11:08 |
| jam | dimitern: it also stems from a group that doesn't have a habit of using a bot to control their trunks, vs the launchpad group using that method for a long time. | 11:08 |
| dimitern | jam: wouldn't it need to merge and push changes? | 11:08 |
| jam | dimitern: goose bot needs to be able to write to goose's trunk | 11:08 |
| jam | I'm not sure that it needs rights to everything else owned by ~gophers | 11:08 |
| jam | (juju-core, goamz, etc, etc.) | 11:08 |
| dimitern | you don't trust the bot? c'mon :D | 11:09 |
| dimitern | it's a nice guy | 11:09 |
| jam | dimitern: the inverse is actually just as important (to me). I would rather the equivalent of having to run 'sudo' to be able to alter trunk. | 11:09 |
| jam | so that: yes anyone on our team can fix trunk if we need to, but we have to do so very explicitly instead of accidentally | 11:10 |
| dimitern | jam, makes sense - preventing accidental mistakes, provided it doesn't impede normal workflow | 11:10 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: reviewed | 11:12 |
| jam | so mostly I'm trying to find the tasteful point in balancing these desires, adding goose-bot to ~gophers is the most expedient solution, though not one I personally control. | 11:12 |
| jam | as is having the branch owned explicitly by goose-bot | 11:12 |
| jam | I suppose goose-bot the launchpad account could just have us all know the password, and all have our ssh-keys attached to the account. | 11:13 |
| jam | mgz: ^^? | 11:13 |
| jam | that would give us "do X to become the goose-bot superuser" | 11:13 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: tyvm | 11:13 |
| jam | mgz: ah, but the problem ends up that only goose-bot can approve changes to ~goose-bot/ branches. I'll have to look into the review side of things to figure out how to fix that | 11:14 |
| mgz | that would probably be okay | 11:14 |
| jam | mgz: looks like you can set a "reviewers" on a branch | 11:15 |
| jam | which I can just make ~gophers | 11:15 |
| mgz | yeah | 11:15 |
| jam | so they can approve branches even though they can't commit directly to it. | 11:15 |
| mgz | jam: poke? | 11:35 |
| wallyworld_ | rogpeppe: i am around now, am in a stand up | 11:35 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld_: np, the issue's been fixed now. | 11:35 |
| wallyworld_ | ok, sorry i was at soccer training | 11:36 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld_: i only pinged you 'cos you were the only one that showed up on the IRC user list :-) | 11:58 |
| wallyworld_ | ah ok | 11:58 |
| wallyworld_ | i didn't log out at my EOD | 11:58 |
| rogpeppe | a couple of CLs if anyone wants. the first one is pretty trivial, the second a bit bigger: https://codereview.appspot.com/7197043/ https://codereview.appspot.com/7133063/ | 11:59 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: I'm on the first one | 11:59 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: thanks | 11:59 |
| === jtv1 is now known as jtv | ||
| dimitern | rogpeppe: reviewed | 12:04 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: thanks | 12:04 |
| rogpeppe | anyone else wanna take it to the magic two LGTMs? :-) https://codereview.appspot.com/7197043/ | 12:04 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: it's weird though, unlike the usual case the first comment wasn't "Please take a look" from you | 12:05 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: ha, i'd forgotten to lbox propose it without -wip | 12:06 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: it's got that message now :-) | 12:07 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: ok :) | 12:07 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: yo! | 12:24 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Heya! | 12:25 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: hey! | 12:28 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: Hey there | 12:28 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: would you like to take a look at this - https://codereview.appspot.com/7181046/ | 12:28 |
| jam | mgz, wallyworld_, dimitern: I just sent you guys an email with the security keys, etc you'll need. I used your public GPG keys, but if you need help figuring out how to decode them, just ask. | 12:34 |
| dimitern | jam: cheers | 12:34 |
| dimitern | jam: yep, I have to replace that PGP key for which I forgot the passphrase a long time ago | 12:37 |
| dimitern | jam: I'll do it today and you can resend it with my new key perhaps? | 12:38 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: small CL to make add multiple addrs to the API: https://codereview.appspot.com/7197043/ | 12:42 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: CHecking | 12:43 |
| dimitern | thanks | 12:43 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Super, thanks | 12:43 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Btw, have you had a chance to check that bug Dave filed? | 12:45 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: which one? | 12:45 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: The one saying bootstrap is broken | 12:45 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i couldn't reproduce it. i suspect he was running without --upload-tools. | 12:46 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Have you tried in the regions he suggested? | 12:47 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Or at least one of them? | 12:47 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i'll do that. the error in the bug report "error: API entity name not found in configuration" should not be possible to happen in the branch he was talking about. | 12:48 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: but there may well be another bug | 12:48 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I'm poking because he asked there, so it'd be good to at least interact to clarify the bug | 12:48 |
| niemeyer | Since Dave isn't on the same timezone, if we don't get back to him on async locations, we won't talk | 12:49 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: Any significant change to the ec2 logic on that bootstrap function? | 12:51 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: how do you mean? | 12:52 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: no, it's essentially the same | 12:52 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: the Bootstrap() code, that is | 12:52 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i'm trying it now | 12:54 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Thanks a lot | 12:55 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: Cool, I was really just curious if there was anything that had to be done differently there | 12:55 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: It's great that there isn't (except for Roger's point in the CL, which I agree with) | 12:55 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: Have you seen rogpeppe's comment? | 12:56 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: Are there consistency issues there too? | 12:56 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: well, it's seems not - both tests (svc doubles and live) pass - although on canonistack the lack of floating IPs fails the test, but everything else works | 12:56 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: about consistency - not sure how to test that, but I've run into other consistency issues with OS on some API calls | 12:57 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: Oh, consistency issues and "seems" don't go well together :-) | 12:57 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: The idea, in S3, is that the answer is totally arbitrary for an undefined period of time | 12:58 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i suggest starting without any of the eventual-consistency loops, and seeing if things still work. | 12:58 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: You create, and it's not there.. you delete, and it's still there | 12:58 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Please no | 12:58 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: I've had the same issues with swift while doing live tests | 12:58 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: We already have the logic for that.. let's not introduce the bug to see if we can hit it | 12:58 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: creating/deleting/modifying containers in quick succession | 12:59 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: I agree with you cleaner would be better, but let's ask someone that actually knows that stuff if OpenStack is consistent or not | 12:59 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i suppose so. but if there are no such issues in openstack, then that code is more complex for no good reason | 12:59 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: yes, that's a good plan | 12:59 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Sure, that's the part I agree.. I just don't think rolling back something we know works well to wait for the bug is great | 13:00 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: Oh, then it has the same issues | 13:00 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: well, we can ask yes, but how can it be consistent, when the arch is the same - distributed, multi-tier, API disconnected from the actual service, etc. | 13:00 |
| niemeyer | dimitern, rogpeppe: I suggest just leaving the same logic there then | 13:00 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: yeah, I agree | 13:01 |
| niemeyer | dimitern, rogpeppe: If we start to have a few other backends with the exact same logic of Bootstrap, we should factor it out.. | 13:01 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: agreed | 13:01 |
| niemeyer | dimitern, rogpeppe: That said, I think OpenStack is perhaps too similar to EC2.. I suggest seeing how the others look like before going over the trouble of generalizing | 13:01 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: +1 | 13:02 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: +1 as well - let's not refactor/optimize prematurely :) | 13:02 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: LGTM | 13:06 |
| niemeyer | dimitern: Does it work for real already? | 13:07 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: great, 10x | 13:07 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: yes it does on canonistack, partially | 13:07 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: starting the instance works, putting the tools, all ok, except for the floating iP shortage, which fails to add an address to the machine after building | 13:08 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: can I consider your review as LGTM as well, with the points mentioned addressed? | 13:14 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i'll have a quick once-over, if that's ok | 13:15 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i have a suspicion that eventual-consistency issues are fouling upload-tools. | 13:16 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: you mean repropose it after changes before submitting? | 13:16 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: yeah | 13:16 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: sure | 13:16 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: ah, no that's not it. | 13:18 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: reproposed - https://codereview.appspot.com/7181046/ | 13:20 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: looking | 13:21 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: LGTM | 13:22 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: cheers | 13:22 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: bootstrap against sa-east-1 works fine for me, although it failed for me first time because i used a different juju to the one it was uploading | 13:23 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i suspect that was dfc's issue too | 13:24 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Curious.. was the symptom the same? | 13:24 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: similar | 13:24 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: the problem (for me) was that it was making the cloudinit script with an old version of the agent config data structure. | 13:25 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: How did that change again? | 13:27 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: This kind of thing is interesting to observe and keep in mind | 13:27 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: THis is a major breakage | 13:27 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: in my case, i was using a version that produced JSON, not YAML | 13:27 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Ah, that | 13:27 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: the problem is that we're not incrementing the version numbers when we make incompatible changes | 13:27 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: which is of course convenient when we're breaking things all the time, but will lead to these kinds of issue | 13:28 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: actually... i don't think we check that the tools we're uploading are compatible with the version that's running. that should be fixed, if true. | 13:30 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: (not that that would've helped here though | 13:31 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: What I mean is that breaking isn't okay.. the problem is breaking | 13:31 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: and breaking without even being aware that you're breaking | 13:32 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i was very aware that i was making breaking changes | 13:32 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: You should mention that, and coordinate with Dave an update to the tools | 13:32 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Since whatever is up there doesn't work anymore | 13:33 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Just being aware isn't quite enough :) | 13:33 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i was presuming dave was updating the tools on every release, given that every release is breaking backward compatibility, pretty much | 13:33 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Sorry, I'm talking past you | 13:34 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: the next one is going to too - how big a priority for us is preserving backward compatibility currently? | 13:34 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Please coordinate with Dave when you introduce breaking changes. | 13:34 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Thanks. | 13:35 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: will do | 13:35 |
| rogpeppe | lunch | 13:43 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Please ping once you're back | 14:20 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: ping | 14:20 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Yo :) | 14:20 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Do you have some time for a call in.. 10 mins? | 14:20 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: sure | 14:20 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: COol thanks | 14:20 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Will send the invite | 14:32 |
| aram | I won't be able to join today's kanban meeting, have to run to some place. mramm, I think this applies to our 1:1 as well (though not 100% yet, I might be back soon enough). | 14:48 |
| mramm | I may not be able to make the 1 on 1 either | 14:48 |
| mramm | there are sabdfl meetings all day here in Austin | 14:49 |
| === slank_away is now known as slank | ||
| rogpeppe | is anyone gonna make the kanban meeting? | 15:02 |
| rogpeppe | i'll be there if anyone else will | 15:02 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade, mramm: hiya | 15:08 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: how's tricks? | 15:08 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, heyhey, not bad thanks | 15:09 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, and yourself? | 15:09 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: not bad at all thanks, pushing on. | 15:09 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: missing your reviews :-) | 15:10 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, awesome | 15:10 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I came here with the best of intentions but it's been hard to find the energy ;) | 15:10 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: no, i wouldn't expect you to while you're there tbh | 15:10 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, jolly good :) | 15:11 |
| dimitern | fwereade: hey :) how's texas? | 15:32 |
| === otubo1 is now known as otubo | ||
| niemeyer | Lunch.. biab | 15:52 |
| fwereade | dimitern, heyhey | 15:55 |
| fwereade | dimitern, texas is... texan :) | 15:55 |
| fwereade | dimitern, although that's an unfair thing to say really, this is austin after all | 15:56 |
| fwereade | dimitern, and I've barely left the hotel actually | 15:56 |
| fwereade | dimitern, when not working, sleeping has been high priority | 15:56 |
| fwereade | dimitern, I *am* very happy that my bag was delivered last night | 15:56 |
| fwereade | dimitern, that's 3 timesin a row now | 15:56 |
| fwereade | dimitern, tyvm for reviews btw | 15:56 |
| dimitern | fwereade: wow, lost again? | 15:57 |
| fwereade | dimitern, yep :/ | 15:57 |
| fwereade | dimitern, I'm getting used to it now though | 15:57 |
| dimitern | fwereade: np, my pleasure | 15:57 |
| dimitern | fwereade: hehe, all in there? | 15:57 |
| fwereade | dimitern, yeah, nothing lost | 15:57 |
| fwereade | dimitern, all I really suffered was a brief blood-pressure spike at houston | 15:58 |
| dimitern | fwereade: hmm, that doesn't sound good | 15:58 |
| dimitern | fwereade: how was the flight? | 15:58 |
| fwereade | dimitern, only metaphorical -- a brief internal GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH | 15:59 |
| fwereade | dimitern, flight was way smoother than I expected given the weather at heathrow | 15:59 |
| fwereade | dimitern, greenland was covered in clouds, which was a shame, that place is *beautiful* if you have a nice view from 40000ft | 16:00 |
| dimitern | fwereade: yeah, the cancelled like 250 flights that day | 16:00 |
| fwereade | dimitern, oof, luckier than I thought then :) | 16:00 |
| dimitern | luckily you managed to sneak through | 16:00 |
| fwereade | dimitern, was able to be pretty relaxed about the prospect though, I could always have stayed the night with my sister, she's pretty close | 16:01 |
| dimitern | fwereade: she always seems around when you're somewhere on a trip :) | 16:01 |
| fwereade | dimitern, heh, maybe :) | 16:01 |
| fwereade | hazmat, ping | 16:03 |
| dimitern | fwereade: we have bootstrap working with openstack now, landed today | 16:04 |
| fwereade | dimitern, w00t! | 16:04 |
| dimitern | :) | 16:04 |
| dimitern | yeah, it's taking shape faster now I think | 16:04 |
| dimitern | the provider | 16:05 |
| hazmat | fwereade, pong | 16:05 |
| fwereade | hazmat, I think we have enough people to discuss identities if you can tear yourelf away | 16:05 |
| fwereade | hazmat, mramm has been collecting interested parties | 16:05 |
| rogpeppe | i'd love a review of this branch, if anyone can spare a mo. i'm stacking up stuff on top of it. it shouldn't be too bad, despite the number of files changed: https://codereview.appspot.com/7133063/ | 16:08 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: unfortunately the branch you reviewed earlier was WIP for a good reason - i hadn't got tests to pass yet! | 16:55 |
| mgz | minor details :) | 16:55 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i've now updated it so they do, but somehow it was necessary to add some more stuff along the way, and it's acquired a dependency. if you could have another look (and at the dependency too), that'd be great. https://codereview.appspot.com/7197049/ | 16:56 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: sorry, just saw this | 17:19 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: np | 17:19 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: I'll take a look now | 17:19 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: thanks | 17:19 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: while I'm on it, would like to look at https://codereview.appspot.com/7195046 | 17:20 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: looking | 17:21 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Would be interesting to have your opinion on https://codereview.appspot.com/7149043/ | 17:23 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: as you're working right around it | 17:23 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i've pinged dfc for a conversation about this | 17:24 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: hopefully we'll have one tonight | 17:24 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i think it's the wrong thing to do, but he might have better plans than me, so i want a chat before commenting too much | 17:24 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: What seems wrong, specifically? | 17:25 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Looks quite straightforward to me | 17:25 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i think it should be a machiner job, not a new subcommand | 17:25 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Ah, indeed | 17:26 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: then it works at the same level as the API server, and in the future we'll be able to dynamically adjust servers etc | 17:26 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Agreed | 17:26 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: you've got a review | 17:26 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: thanks a lot | 17:26 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Would you mind to point that out in the CL? | 17:26 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Even if you include "Let's talk live about it."? | 17:26 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: ok, i will do | 17:26 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Thanks! | 17:27 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: The stater itself looked nice.. I've skimmed over too quickly thinking it was a job as well | 17:27 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: yes, the stater itself is ok, but i'm not sure it works very well as a task | 17:28 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: most of the logic is fine though | 17:28 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Maybe it needs additional stuff, but what's there seems well structured, and necessary | 17:29 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: yes. i'm not entirely sure that worker/stater is the right place, but all the unpacking and running logic is good, which makes up the bulk. | 17:30 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Seems right as a worker too | 17:30 |
| dimitern | mgz: ping | 17:30 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i was wondering if the tar unpacking code might live nicely in a standalone package, but it's probably ok where it is until we need it elsewhere. | 17:31 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Indeed | 17:31 |
| rogpeppe | niemeyer: i'm going to try to catch dave tonight - about when he starts work. | 17:33 |
| niemeyer | rogpeppe: Super, cheers | 17:33 |
| dimitern | niemeyer: if you have time, take a look at https://codereview.appspot.com/7195046/ | 17:44 |
| * rogpeppe just started running first live test that connects to the API server... i wonder if it'll work. | 17:52 | |
| mgz | rogpeppe: did it? :) | 18:00 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: still running... | 18:00 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: oh, darn | 18:01 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: failed | 18:01 |
| mgz | ;_; | 18:01 |
| dimitern | mgz: ah, you're here :) can you look at this https://codereview.appspot.com/7195046/ - especially the way private and public addresses are discovered (ported the logic from py-juju) | 18:01 |
| mgz | dimitern: sure | 18:01 |
| dimitern | mgz: thanks | 18:02 |
| mgz | you ported the tests too, right? :) | 18:02 |
| dimitern | mgz: well, not really, but I test for all paths I think | 18:03 |
| mgz | the tests are the bit with value, because they cover the sort of json I actually saw in the wild | 18:03 |
| dimitern | mgz: I see, then I could port their essence as well | 18:04 |
| mgz | hm... and GetServerAddresses really shouldn't be needed, it's included in servers/{}/detail which juju is likely using in all cases | 18:07 |
| dimitern | mgz: unfortunately, it's not the same always | 18:08 |
| mgz | that's an ongoing issue though, the ip/name bindings aren't static | 18:09 |
| mgz | unless you mean something else? | 18:09 |
| dimitern | mgz: sometimes (at startup, but it happened to me multiple times after some uptime) the address fields are empty there, while the /ips returns them correctly | 18:09 |
| mgz | right | 18:09 |
| mgz | well, ips will only work once a binding exists | 18:10 |
| mgz | but that's pretty much the same thing | 18:10 |
| dimitern | what binding? | 18:10 |
| dimitern | i'm not talking about floating ips | 18:10 |
| mgz | when you first start a machine, you get details back before the networking setup is done | 18:11 |
| dimitern | the automatic ones nova assigns at boot | 18:11 |
| mgz | there's a hack you might notice in the python code that polls for contents of addresses in launch in one case (where you need to assign a floating ip) | 18:11 |
| dimitern | mgz: yes, but even after that /servers/detail won't get me the addresses - they're always empty | 18:11 |
| mgz | they're not always empty, they're just initially empty | 18:12 |
| dimitern | mgz: well, /ips works even at BUILD, while /servers/detail doesn't | 18:12 |
| mgz | I think because it reflects current reality rather than intent or something | 18:12 |
| mgz | it works at BUILD, just not straight away, only when it's actually bound | 18:12 |
| mgz | anyway, this might be a neat trick for the moment | 18:13 |
| dimitern | anyway, it's not reliable to use /servers/detail for addresses in my experience | 18:14 |
| dimitern | and having it this way simplifies the tests / doubles a bit | 18:14 |
| mgz | really juju needs to learn that addresses aren't reliable | 18:15 |
| dimitern | :) | 18:15 |
| dimitern | especially if they float | 18:15 |
| mgz | but if this hacks around that broken assumption for now, it's not the end of the world | 18:15 |
| dimitern | yeah | 18:17 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: i was listening on localhost! | 18:21 |
| rogpeppe | time to stop | 18:24 |
| rogpeppe | g'night all | 18:24 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: c u | 18:25 |
| mgz | dimitern: commented, fine overall, but I think much of that code should live in juju-core | 18:30 |
| dimitern | mgz: thanks, I'll think about it some more tomorrow | 18:30 |
| fwereade | davecheney, ping | 20:14 |
| fwereade | davecheney, I need to head to meetings in a few minutes but I should be on again in a couple of hours, let me know if I can clarify anything... | 20:38 |
| rogpeppe | davecheney: ping | 22:01 |
| davecheney | rogpeppe: ack | 22:18 |
| rogpeppe | davecheney: yo! | 22:18 |
| rogpeppe | davecheney: G+? | 22:18 |
| davecheney | sure | 22:19 |
| davecheney | ringing ... | 22:23 |
| davecheney | this is fucking annoying | 22:23 |
| davecheney | can we use Skype like grownups ? | 22:23 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!