| mramm | bar/cafe in 15 min? | 00:02 |
|---|---|---|
| === slank is now known as slank_away | ||
| wallyworld | davecheney: there's no easy way for me to call unexported functions on a struct from a test in different package is there? i want to be able to poke the internal state of something to set it up for a test but not have to use the public api which is insufficient | 00:30 |
| davecheney | wallyworld: var F = f() | 00:35 |
| davecheney | put that in export_test.go | 00:35 |
| davecheney | if they are methods then you can extend the struct in export_test.go and forward the methods | 00:35 |
| davecheney | hang on, i'll find you a good example | 00:35 |
| davecheney | wallyworld: juju-core/environs/export_test.go is a good example of the former | 00:36 |
| davecheney | juju-core/environs/ec2/export_test.go is an example of the latter | 00:36 |
| wallyworld | davecheney: but what about if the test code is in a different package to the unexported stuff | 00:37 |
| davecheney | unpossible | 00:37 |
| wallyworld | :-( | 00:37 |
| wallyworld | that's quite a limiation | 00:37 |
| davecheney | it is the way it is | 00:38 |
| davecheney | stuffs either exported or not | 00:38 |
| wallyworld | so now we have to go and make a whole bunch of stuff public sadly | 00:38 |
| davecheney | yup, Go has no concept of Protected or Friend | 00:38 |
| wallyworld | np, thanks for clarifying | 00:38 |
| wallyworld | I keep running into such limitations with Go | 00:39 |
| davecheney | there is a long and boring explanation that justifies it | 00:39 |
| davecheney | but the short version is, it is what it is | 00:39 |
| wallyworld | fair enough | 00:40 |
| davecheney | wallyworld: one possibility | 00:43 |
| davecheney | add exported methods to your type | 00:44 |
| davecheney | but return an interface to 'filter' those methods | 00:44 |
| davecheney | then ou can type assert back to the original type | 00:44 |
| davecheney | that may or may not be applicable | 00:44 |
| wallyworld | davecheney: thanks, will look into that. the use case is that we have service doubles for nova etc, and want tests to be able to poke the internal state | 00:45 |
| rogpeppe1 | davecheney: mornin' | 07:47 |
| rogpeppe1 | wallyworld, jam: review of a trivial environs/openstack change? https://codereview.appspot.com/7196054 | 08:30 |
| TheMue | Morning | 09:28 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: hiya | 09:58 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: good conference? | 09:58 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: Yes, many interesting talks there (typically mostly not about our business but still good). | 10:09 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: And my own talk has been good, the people have been very interested (many questions). | 10:10 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: what did you talk about? | 10:10 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: Additionally my publisher and I had a possible idea for my next book. ;) | 10:10 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: I talked about world-wide distributed development of open-source software. Guess why. :D | 10:11 |
| rogpeppe1 | :-) | 10:11 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: and your book idea? | 10:11 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: It's this time not technological, but about how to present or give talks from very small groups like in a pre-sales presentation over stuff like trainings or lightning talks in the own company up to talks on conferences. | 10:13 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: interesting. | 10:13 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: I like this topic since a longer time and we found, that many IT people have problems in present their ideas or products. | 10:15 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: Many are introverted, but after they visited a training they shall present it to the rest of the team. Or they shall support the sales team. Those are the people we wonna address. | 10:17 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: yeah. | 10:18 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: Yesterday I had to write my first obituary, Andreas Raab, a Smalltalk developer died. Has been a hard job. | 10:21 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: yeah, very hard to get right | 10:21 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: And how has the Juju week been? | 10:22 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: pretty quiet with william and yourself away | 10:22 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: OK, right now Daves timezone is really bad. So you only have been three. | 10:23 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: yeah | 10:23 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: i did manage to have a chat with dave for the first time this year a couple of days ago :-) | 10:23 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: 10pm for me, 9am for him... | 10:23 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: Hehe, yes, sometimes when I'm still in the net I see him starting his day. | 10:24 |
| mgz | dimitern: these bootstrap tests taking this long isn't normal, right? <http://paste.ubuntu.com/1569225/> | 10:33 |
| mgz | ...no dimitern | 10:34 |
| mgz | oh, and rogpeppe has a branch up that looks pertinent | 10:35 |
| mgz | rogpeppe1: taking 12 seconds on that test still seems unreasonable, but your branch is an improvement | 10:38 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: it was the first immediate cause that i could see | 10:39 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: starting and stopping mongo is fairly slow and often accounts for quite a bit of time | 10:39 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: 6s is spent compiling the juju source | 10:42 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: that will probably drop when we move to using a single binary (linking is the slowest part of go compilation) | 10:45 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: please respond to the review if you approve of it. | 10:45 |
| mgz | rogpeppe1: I'm on it. | 10:45 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: ta | 10:45 |
| mgz | ...I hate having to spend 5 minutes just to understand the imports when doing review... why is this in export_test.go but that is package openstack and imported from that name... ;_; | 10:54 |
| mgz | shall just trust it makes some kind of sense. | 10:54 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: yeah too many "openstack" identifiers | 11:03 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: openstack := openstack.New() :-) | 11:04 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: things are easier when you have a tool that can reliably show you the definition of any identifier you find. | 11:05 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: i could give you one, but you'd have to tool it into whatever editor you use | 11:05 |
| rogpeppe1 | jam: second opinion on https://codereview.appspot.com/7196054/ ? it's pretty trivial. | 11:07 |
| mgz | rogpeppe1: Fridays aren't work days in UAE, dimitern should be around though? | 11:09 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: doesn't appear to be | 11:09 |
| rogpeppe1 | mgz: trivial enough to submit anyway? | 11:09 |
| mgz | yeah, I would. | 11:10 |
| === TheRealMue is now known as TheMue | ||
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: I've got SMTP problems today with our server (IMAP is OK). Do you have the same troubles? | 13:12 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: looks ok. last message came in for me an hour ago. i'll try to see if i can send myself a message. | 13:21 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe1: Receiving is fine here too, only sending doesn't work due to an SSL error. | 13:23 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: yes, i'm getting email fine | 13:24 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: ah, ok, i'll try sending you an email | 13:24 |
| rogpeppe1 | TheMue: ok, i've sent you an email. | 13:24 |
| === rogpeppe1 is now known as rogpeppe | ||
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Has worked, hmm, have to look deeper. Thanks. | 13:27 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Ha, found it. It has been a change in my network configuration due to the conference rooms and the hotel. Now it is working again. | 14:01 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: cool | 14:12 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: are you back home? | 14:12 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: Yep | 14:13 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ping | 14:42 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, pong | 14:42 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, how's it going? | 14:42 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: not bad. i've just made a list of state entry points and the entities that currently use/need to use them | 14:43 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1569931/ | 14:43 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, excellent | 14:43 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: the fuzzy bits are around uniter | 14:43 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: (every time i say "restrictions?" it means i don't know what restrictions there should be | 14:44 |
| rogpeppe | ) | 14:44 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i'd appreciate it if you could go over it and have a check for sanity/omitted bits | 14:44 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: in fact, maybe i'll make it a google doc | 14:44 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, +1 | 14:44 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, one thing that leaps out is State.EnvironConfig, which the uniter uses but shouldn't | 14:45 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/document/d/16irceDbjcOuQElcRT1pjL2cCbSF_-YSXg7Yte9Qf3RI/edit | 14:45 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: yes, i've got my eye on that | 14:46 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, it just needs State.EnvironType | 14:46 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: indeed | 14:46 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, and it's not clear why machines need charms or relations | 14:46 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, re AssignUnit, would you take a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1101139 and let me know your thoughts? | 14:47 |
| _mup_ | Bug #1101139: units are not assigned transactionally <juju-core:New> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/1101139 > | 14:47 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ah yes, those were from early in my list making, and i got it wrong. | 14:48 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, cool | 14:48 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: fixed in the google doc | 14:49 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I seem to be view only on the doc | 14:49 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: are you as your canonical address? | 14:50 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, it seems to think I am | 14:50 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ah, sorry, i misinterpreted a message. changed. | 14:50 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: you should be able to edit now | 14:51 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, cheers | 14:51 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: we're going to have to think carefully about permissions checking, and how to make so we don't incur an extra round trip (api server <-> mongo) on many operations just to check permissions. | 14:52 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i'm just off to lunch. catch you in a little bit, i hope. | 14:52 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, enjoy, please consider that bug I linked | 14:53 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, it impacts that doc quite hard if I'm not on crack | 14:53 |
| === slank_away is now known as slank | ||
| fwereade | aram, ping | 14:58 |
| dimitern | fwereade: hey, aram said yesterday he wasn't feeling well | 15:04 |
| fwereade | dimitern, heh, ok, I wish he'd mail us about this sort of thing | 15:05 |
| dimitern | fwereade: dunno | 15:05 |
| dimitern | fwereade: how's it going there? | 15:05 |
| fwereade | dimitern, np, thanks for letting us know | 15:05 |
| fwereade | dimitern, pretty good actually, I feel like we know what we're doing | 15:05 |
| fwereade | dimitern, how's the rock? | 15:06 |
| dimitern | fwereade: that's good! :) | 15:06 |
| dimitern | fwereade: raining pretty much every day lately.. but sometimes sunshine | 15:06 |
| fwereade | dimitern, cool, looking forward to coming back | 15:07 |
| dimitern | fwereade: it's seems the weather in the morning is plotting against my idea to go for a run - it always pours early | 15:07 |
| fwereade | dimitern, haha | 15:07 |
| dimitern | fwereade: yeah, I realized I forgot to give you something from back home | 15:07 |
| fwereade | dimitern, yay, bulgarian deliciousness | 15:08 |
| fwereade | dimitern, looking forward to it :) | 15:08 |
| dimitern | fwereade: not really, this is more to look at :) one of my mother's pastels | 15:08 |
| fwereade | dimitern, oh wow! | 15:08 |
| dimitern | fwereade: I'll get it next time | 15:09 |
| fwereade | dimitern, excellent | 15:09 |
| fwereade | dimitern, I'll be back sunday lunchtime, flights permitting, and will probably be trying to stay up until night time, so I'll probably be around a bit | 15:10 |
| dimitern | fwereade: great | 15:10 |
| fwereade | bbiab | 15:10 |
| dimitern | fwereade: btw, if you happen to pass a book store which has Iain M Bank's The Hydrogen Sonata - it's worth getting one ;) excellent | 15:11 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern, fwereade: i've almost finished Gone Away World, which is brilliant too | 15:50 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: who's the author? | 15:50 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: nick harkaway. | 15:51 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: its his first novel | 15:51 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, oh yes? cool | 15:52 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, dimitern: I enjoyed Blue Remembered Earth (alastar reynolds) | 15:52 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe: i'll check it out, 10x | 15:52 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i'll bring it to the sprint if you haven't got it first | 15:53 |
| * TheMue just started Porterhouse Blue by Tom Sharpe. Not easy for a non-native speaker. | 15:53 | |
| dimitern | fwereade: more reynolds stuff, good | 15:53 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: brilliant twists | 15:53 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, cool, I might be up to date on your books by then :) | 15:53 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: :-) | 15:53 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, excellent, it is always nice to be surprised -- the things in BRE that were, I think, meant to be surprises were... less so | 15:54 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: it's also extremely funny | 15:54 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, and I've got a mental option on a surprise for the next book | 15:54 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, excellent | 15:54 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: BTW are we always guaranteed that there's only one provisioner? | 15:55 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: how does that fit with HA? | 15:55 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: (looking at your description of the bug you mentioned) | 15:56 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, IMO, no we are not, because we will require that the provisioner be HA as well | 15:56 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: so this is spurious, right? | 15:56 |
| rogpeppe | we could trust the Provisioner (which also has Environ access) to do exactly the same things... but without races (because there's only one provisioner). | 15:56 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I think I address that a bit further down, I'm talking about Right Now at that point | 15:56 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ok | 15:56 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ha, i thought i'd got to the end | 15:57 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, ie we'll need some sort of magic locking for the provisioner and I'm comfortable handwaing that for now | 15:57 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: yeah. taking a lease on a unit might work for locking. | 15:58 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I'm partly wondering whether ultra-coarse-grained locking might be acceptable for the forseeable future | 15:59 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, only one provisioner active at once | 15:59 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: doesn't it have to be some kind of lease? otherwise a hung-up provisioner will stop other provisioners from running. | 15:59 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: but coarse-grained is probably fine, yeah | 16:00 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, sure, I'm just talking about the graininess | 16:00 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: big +1 on the suggestion in the bug | 16:00 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, excellent, ty | 16:01 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i don't think it loses generality, as we can always provide the means for a client to *specify* a machine when adding the unit, even if it doesn't allocate it itself. | 16:01 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, yeah, indeed | 16:02 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: in that case, the unit may remain unassigned, but i think that's ok | 16:02 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, hmm, we will need to be careful about that | 16:02 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: we could treat it as a broken unit | 16:02 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, yeah, but we still need to write new code to handle it anyway | 16:03 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: it's really the responsibility of whoever is adding units, if they're specifying machines that clash. | 16:03 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, a direct assignment from the CLI is not necessarily too horrible txn-wise | 16:04 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: but, yeah, it would be nice to be able to say "this machine should not be taken by a random addunit; save it for explicit assignment instead" | 16:04 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ah that's true! | 16:04 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: the problem is in searching for an unassigned machine | 16:04 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, it's just the assignment dance that gives me night terrors ;) | 16:04 |
| fwereade | yeah | 16:05 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: yeah, it's not great, and there's no recovery. | 16:05 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: and this change would pave the way for set-unit-count too, if we wanted that | 16:06 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, +1 | 16:06 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, (I think we do, but there's no time for that this cycle ;)) | 16:06 |
| * fwereade slopes off for another ciggie | 16:06 | |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: indeed | 16:06 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: "(not deploy: relations added in AddService)" | 16:16 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: Conn.AddService calls State.AddRelation | 16:16 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: so i still think we have to say State.AddRelation is currently called by juju deploy. | 16:17 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: we may well wish to factor the juju.Conn calls into their own rpc calls though | 16:17 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: or... perhaps Conn.AddService no longer needs to add peer relations? | 16:18 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I'm about to propose that change | 16:19 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ah! | 16:19 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I've actually dropped Conn.AddService -- the only thing it did was to choose a name for the service if empty | 16:20 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, (apart from the relations, that is) | 16:20 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: +1 | 16:20 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, actually, can I ask you to take a quick look at the reviews I have up? there are a couple with 1 LGTM | 16:22 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ok, will do | 16:23 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: which one first? | 16:24 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, cli-destroy-service is easiest | 16:25 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, other ones in order | 16:25 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I ballsed up the prereqs a little, https://codereview.appspot.com/7205058 doesn't strictly require it, but I'm not changing it now... and the followup does require all the prereqs | 16:29 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i'm getting "chunk mismatch" on https://codereview.appspot.com/7138062/ | 16:29 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, ah balls | 16:30 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i can review the raw diffs though | 16:30 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: assuming they're not too involved | 16:30 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, it's trivial frankly | 16:31 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: LGTM with a couple of trivial comments | 16:36 |
| === fss is now known as fsouza | ||
| fwereade | rogpeppe, cheers | 16:39 |
| === fsouza is now known as fss | ||
| rogpeppe | fwereade: have you run all the tests on https://codereview.appspot.com/7205058/ ? | 16:58 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, yes | 16:58 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, is something obviously screwed? | 16:59 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: ah ha! i believe you haven't run the live tests. | 16:59 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, ah! | 16:59 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: in livetests.go: | 16:59 |
| rogpeppe | svc, err := conn.State.AddService("", sch) | 16:59 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, good catch, thank you | 16:59 |
| * fwereade hangs head in shame | 16:59 | |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: it will probably work once you've fixed that, but worth running live tests anyway :-) | 17:00 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, will do | 17:00 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i think you've got reviews on everything now | 17:08 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, <3 | 17:08 |
| TheMue | yip | 17:08 |
| fwereade | TheMue, <3 also :) | 17:08 |
| fwereade | TheMue, would you take a very quick look at https://codereview.appspot.com/7198051/ please? | 17:24 |
| TheMue | fwereade: Oh, missed it. Sure. *click* | 17:37 |
| TheMue | fwereade: You've got a +1 on it. ;) | 17:41 |
| fwereade | TheMue, cheers | 17:46 |
| TheMue | fwereade: yw | 17:47 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: if you have some moments, it'd be great to fill out the rest of that api doc. particularly the uniter parts. i'm not sure what restrictions are appropriate for a uniter on accessing other units. | 18:24 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, good point, ty | 18:24 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: have a safe trip back | 18:24 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, cheers, have a good weekend :) | 18:24 |
| rogpeppe | and great weekends to all | 18:25 |
| rogpeppe | g'night | 18:25 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!