[00:44] <thumper> davecheney: are you available for a hangout later?
[00:46] <davecheney> thumper: i certainly am
[00:47] <davecheney> you are 2 ? 3 ? hours ahead of me ?
[04:43] <davecheney> thumper: if you're still around, are you free to chat ?
[04:43] <thumper> davecheney: hey
[04:43] <thumper> davecheney: let me just check on the family...
[04:43] <davecheney> if you want, we can try agian tomorrow
[04:43] <davecheney> maybe it would make more sense after le' meeting
[04:44] <davecheney> probably a better time for your anyway
[04:46] <thumper> davecheney: let me just check on the family...\
[04:47] <thumper> ugh
[04:47] <thumper> stupid up arrow
[04:54] <niemeyer> davecheney: yo
[04:54] <niemeyer> What's up folks
[04:54] <niemeyer> thumper: Heya, welcome to juju
[04:55] <thumper> hi niemeyer
[04:55] <thumper> thanks
[04:55] <thumper> niemeyer: I have been thinking serioursly about it now since we kinda chatted in miami about it
[04:55] <thumper> then it was more of a joke
[04:55] <thumper> happy to be on board now
[04:56]  * thumper needs to go and make dinner
[04:56] <thumper> niemeyer: isn't it late for you?
[04:56] <niemeyer> thumper: Yeah, I figured by then, but when we talked recently I got the impression you were actually jumping in
[04:56] <niemeyer> thumper: Depends on the point of view
[04:56] <niemeyer> thumper: It's about to be early too :)
[04:56] <thumper> :)
[04:56] <thumper> I suppose it matters if you have slept yet or not
[04:57] <thumper> niemeyer: I was going to just rotate in for a short while
[04:57] <thumper> but in the end, it became more of a dive
[04:57] <thumper> longer term
[04:57] <niemeyer> thumper: Very happy to hear that
[04:57] <thumper> it'll be fun
[04:57] <thumper> I've been keeping a file of questions :)
[04:57] <thumper> it is getting quite long now
[04:57] <thumper> some I have found out myself by reading more
[04:58] <thumper> others are still open
[04:58] <thumper> but I have some calls scheduled with jcastro and davecheney now
[04:58] <niemeyer> thumper: It's a brilliant team to be part of, and it's even better with you in
[04:58] <thumper> thanks for that :-)
[04:58] <thumper> I'm love working with smart people
[04:59] <thumper> makes for interesting times
[04:59] <thumper> s/I'm/I/
[04:59]  * thumper steps away from the keyboard to go make dinner
[07:46] <rogpeppe> morning all!
[07:46] <TheMue> morning rogpeppe
[07:49] <dimitern> morning!
[07:49]  * TheMue just listens to The Dark Side of the Moon, 40 years of great music ...
[07:50] <dimitern> ready for an early meeting? ;)
[07:50] <dimitern> TheMue: +1, yeah, oldies-goldies
[07:50] <TheMue> dimitern: Early? What shall Mark say? :D
[07:51] <dimitern> :)
[07:51] <dimitern> it's actually late there
[07:51] <dimitern> too late to be early
[07:52] <TheMue> dimitern: Hehe, indeed also a way to handle it.
[07:52] <davecheney> morning
[07:53] <dimitern> davecheney: evening :)
[07:53] <davecheney> touche
[07:55] <TheMue> davecheney: hiya
[07:56] <thumper> hmm...
[07:56] <thumper> I hope this doesn't get too confusing
[07:56] <thumper> in another channel there is TheMuso
[07:59] <TheMue> thumper: Never had any conflicts.
[08:00] <TheMue> thumper: In 1997 mue has been enough, but later often other people claimed it.
[08:03] <jam> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/3054ca9e05632bb677f4a136cc956486d9aac90f
[08:03] <jam> for anyone not here yet
[08:04] <mgz> ta
[08:04] <rogpeppe> TheMue: ^
[08:04] <jam> mgz: w7z: https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/3054ca9e05632bb677f4a136cc956486d9aac90f
[08:04] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ^
[08:04] <davecheney> hold up, installing pluginz
[08:06] <TheMue> rogpeppe: ah, thx, link in calendar doesn't work
[08:14] <davecheney> and the hangout plugin segfualted
[08:14] <rogpeppe> joy...
[08:14] <davecheney> hmm, can't talk to any google properties at the moment
[08:14] <davecheney> anyone else dropped off ?
[08:14] <thumper> davecheney: haha
[08:15] <thumper> davecheney: no, just you
[08:15] <rogpeppe> nope, sorry
[08:15] <davecheney> nope, no route to google properties at the moment
[08:16] <rogpeppe> mark's talking about making a kanban board for the command line stuff
[08:16] <davecheney> +1
[08:16] <rogpeppe> 'cos there's a big scrum on that
[08:16] <davecheney> any it's still in the design phase, as I understand it
[08:17] <rogpeppe> "if we get more need for coordination, we can try having a scrum-of-scrums meeting"
[08:19] <rogpeppe> davecheney: is it working for you now?
[08:20] <rogpeppe> davecheney: apparently not :-)
[08:20] <davechen1y> got a few mins
[08:20] <davechen1y> then dropped out again
[08:20] <davechen1y> mark was very choppy
[08:23] <davechen1y> all my google services have eaten a goose egg
[08:23] <davechen1y> gmail is slow
[08:24] <davechen1y> can't get to plus anymore
[08:25] <rogpeppe> we're talking about the floating ip problem
[08:26] <davechen1y> please take notes
[08:29] <rogpeppe> essentially: floating ips are in limited supply and we need some way to work around that
[08:34] <Pavel_> Is there any kind of framework for writing new Charms? At least with ability to handle templates?
[08:35] <Pavel_> It could be great to have some kind of dsl for common cases. Something like Chef have.
[08:52] <Pavel_> Another thing I thought about is custom events, not only joined, changed, broken and departed but any user defined. For now this can be done via relation_ids and relation_set but it seems like workaround for the case.
[08:52] <Pavel_> Do you have such thing in your plans?
[08:56] <jam> mgz: do you remember the rt # +
[08:56] <jam> ?
[09:23] <mramm> thanks everybody for a productive meeting
[10:44] <rogpeppe> Pavel_: a framework for writing charms is a reasonable idea. i think various people have python helper scripts, which could be a start. lots of places to explore here.
[12:36] <TheMue> so, lunchtime, biab
[15:49] <rogpeppe> interesting, live tests against the "enable password checking" branch fail because the tests try to access an api.Machine, which is denied by our policy rules.
[16:00] <jcastro> rogpeppe: did you guys know there's a discussion on juju/go on reddit? http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/18atce/juju_canonical_109k_lines_of_go_code/
[16:01] <rogpeppe> jcastro: nope, hadn't seen that, ta!
[16:01] <jcastro> tell the team, the discussion looks interesting enough for you guys to participate in
[16:05] <teknico> is the 32-bit 2.2.3 MongoDb version on the website good for using with Juju?
[16:05] <teknico> everything on http://juju-dist.s3.amazonaws.com/ is 64-bit
[16:49] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i had to make a slightly more extensive change than i'd expected in response to the live test failure - i implemented the Client type and a skeleton Status method so that live tests could talk to it. would appreciate if you could have another look: https://codereview.appspot.com/7299066
[16:49]  * fwereade_ looks
[16:52] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, LGTM if you write a bug for Client.Status, I don't imagine that's going to be a priority for a couple of days so it's good to have it tracked
[16:52] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, (just that it's very unfinished)
[16:53] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ok, i'll make a ticket
[16:53] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: done
[16:56] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: there are a couple of unresolved comments i responded to too. https://codereview.appspot.com/7299066/diff/3007/state/api/apiserver.go#newcode117 and https://codereview.appspot.com/7299066/diff/3007/state/api/client.go#newcode31 in particular
[16:59] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, sorry, missed those; thanks; responded
[16:59] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: thanks
[17:07] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i've just seen a slightly concerning live test failure: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1639959/
[17:07] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the jujutest code looks plausible, but it seems the unit hasn't gone properly. is it doing something wrong?
[17:08] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: (that was in my branch, which i don't *think* would impact that behaviour, but am testing in trunk now)
[17:09] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, heh, that's that totally crackful bit
[17:09] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ah, i wondered if that was the case
[17:09] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, niemeyer's comment is a bit out of date but correct in intent
[17:09] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: how *should* it remove the unit so it can remove the machine?
[17:09] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the kitchen sink comment?
[17:10] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ah no, i see
[17:10] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I think it should be: (1) destroy unit, wait removed (2) destroy machine, wait removed
[17:10] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I can see that that is maybe inconvenient for you though
[17:11] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, and, hmm, I think there's a bug pointing out that the provisioner doesn't actually remove dead machines
[17:11] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: hmm, there should be convenience methods in juju.Conn to remove units and machines, presumably?
[17:12] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, huh, can't see it obviously, I'm sure I saw it yesterday
[17:12] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, yeah, there's DestroyUnits and DestroyMachines IIRC
[17:12] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: presumably it *did* work, otherwise that test would never have passed
[17:13] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, yeah, but it's also total nonsense -- it tells us nothing about whether anything is working as expected and if anything just causes trouble by doing things that deployed code is expecting to do itself
[17:13] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: really? it seems to verify that something is responding to machine removals by stopping instances, doesn't it?
[17:14] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, yeah, must have been seeing things, provisioner looks like it should work
[17:14] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: should we just lose that part of the test and assume that the deployer is adequately tested? or perhaps you've got a better way of testing that things are working live?
[17:15] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I tend to test live stuff by hand, I have more opportunities to do surprising things and see what happens ;)
[17:16] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i do too, but i think it's important to have some automated tests too
[17:16] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I'd really prefer it if we did have that part of the test doing something sane
[17:17] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, it's not exactly an edge case, seems perverse to leave it out
[17:17] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: so it would be ok to do the above dance (destroy unit, wait destroyed, destroy machine, wait destroyed) ?
[17:17] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I think it should be, yes
[17:17] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, that's the expected interaction
[17:17] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ok, i'll add a TODO ticket for that.
[17:17] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, ok, cool
[17:18] <fwereade_> need to go to the shops; might not get back to work tonight
[17:18] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i'm going soon too
[17:18] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: see ya tomorrow, probs
[17:39] <TheMue> Yeah! Putting files works fine too. Will only extend it to a table driven test tomorrow.
[17:50] <rogpeppe> yay, all the outstanding api branches now submitted!
[18:01] <TheMue> rogpeppe: grats
[18:14] <rogpeppe> good place to stop. g'night all.
[20:18] <thumper> hi jcastro
[20:19] <jcastro> thumper: fire up a G+
[20:19] <thumper> kk
[20:20] <thumper> jcastro: created
[20:43] <thumper> jcastro: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickref.html
[22:06] <davecheney> thumper: any time you're ready
[22:06] <thumper> hi davecheney
[22:07] <thumper> I'm in the middle of writing an email about constraints, but I have a feeling it will be a while, so lets chat now :)
[22:07] <davecheney> nah, it can wait
[22:07] <davecheney> you're documenting stuff
[22:07] <davecheney> that trumps everything
[22:07] <thumper> ok, after lunch then :)
[22:07] <davecheney> kk
[22:08] <thumper> although not so much documenting stuff, but arguing :)
[22:08] <thumper> and trying to get a better understanding
[22:08] <thumper> I'm already getting plans and ideas
[22:08] <thumper> I just hope that then end up sounding rational and useful
[22:09] <davecheney> if you could see your way clear to cc'ing juju-dev, that would be awesome
[22:09] <davecheney> too much silo'ing atm
[22:09] <thumper> who's on juju-dev mailing list?
[22:10] <thumper> it seems that only the admin can see the subscriber list
[22:11] <davecheney> thumper: well, it is all of us devs
[22:11] <davecheney> it is public
[22:11] <davecheney> gustavo or william is probably the admin
[22:11] <thumper> davecheney: my only concern about taking it public is that the chat started private, and I'm always careful about dragging conversations public without letting the others know first
[22:11] <thumper> however I'll do more of a scan
[22:12] <thumper> and remove anything that could be construed weird
[22:12] <davecheney> thumper: understood, see previous head shaking about silo'ing
[22:12] <thumper> mramm: got any objections to me taking the constraints email public?
[22:12] <thumper> davecheney: it was partly for my benefit as I'm still grappling with many concepts
[22:12] <davecheney> thumper: understood that email is a poor documentation medium, but it is better than what we have at the moment
[22:34] <fwereade_> thumper, fwiw I'm happy to have the discussion in public
[22:35] <thumper> fwereade_: awesome, I've cut out most of the initial email and your reply, just leaving relevant bits
[22:35] <thumper> just finishing off the reply now
[22:35] <fwereade_> thumper, cool, cheers
[22:42]  * thumper heads out for an early lunch
[22:42] <thumper> davecheney: I'll ping you when I'm back
[22:45] <fwereade_> thumper, I'm not sure I'll answer that tonight; when you return you might find that some of it has been covered in the recent thread starting at https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/2013-February/000479.html