[00:22]  * hatch attempting to update ubuntu vm
[00:29] <huwshimi> hatch: Have you ever had a problem where IE sits on the "Connecting to the Juju environment" screen and doesn't get any further?
[00:29] <hatch> huwshimi: yep
[00:29] <hatch> and i have NO Idea wtf it is
[00:29] <hatch> no errors, no nothing
[00:29] <huwshimi> yeah...
[00:29] <hatch> just sits there and has a party or something
[00:30] <hatch> if I remember it doesn't even send the ws request
[00:30] <hatch> usually closing the browser down and re-opening it solves the issue
[00:30] <hatch> I get some very odd bugs that are solved by doing that
[00:30] <hatch> haha
[00:30] <hatch> go IE!
[00:31] <huwshimi> hatch: That didn't work for me. Maybe I'll shut down the vm
[00:31] <hatch> hmm
[00:31] <hatch> yeah maybe try that
[00:31] <hatch> and clear the cache like 100x
[00:31] <hatch> sometimes it forgets files in there for fun
[00:36] <huwshimi> hatch: Ah, clearing the cache looks like it fixed it
[00:37] <hatch> oh, heh woops I figured you would have already done that
[00:37] <hatch> haha
[00:37] <hatch> odd ie issue? 1) clear cache 100x 2) restart browser & clear cache 3) restart system 4) install Ubuntu
[00:37] <huwshimi> hatch: I don't think I've ever had a cache issue resulting in something like that...
[00:38] <hatch> every once and a while I'll get a odd DOM issue which requires steps 1 through 3
[00:39] <huwshimi> heh
[00:42] <hatch> I find it very odd that Apple, Dell, and HP are all releasing their new 'pro' haswell laptops in October
[00:43] <hatch> I wonder if this is a supply issue...
[00:43] <Makyo> It is.  They're retiring a bunch of sockets for OEM.
[00:43] <hatch> ohh really?
[00:44] <Makyo> Yeah.  I mean, LGA775 went away a few years ago, and 1366 or whatever it is now, the late core2/i7/9 series is going away.
[00:44] <Makyo> Friend from Intel's been working on Haswell.  Sounds fun, if waaaay over my head.
[00:48] <hatch> ahhh
[00:48] <hatch> hah yeah the processor stuff kind of blows my mind
[00:48] <jcsackett> so it's confirmed that it'll be october?
[00:48] <jcsackett> i've heard rumors, but seen nothing concrete.
[00:48] <hatch> jcsackett: no just rumors
[00:48] <hatch> but Dell and HP both say October
[00:49] <hatch> so if their rumors say Oct and the others are definitely saying Oct
[00:49] <hatch> I'd put money on it :)
[01:04] <hatch> It's going to be a prety interesting segment - will have to see the reviews for the Dell and HP to see if they even come close to the MBP
[01:09] <hatch> rick_h_: gary_poster so the issue with my juju-core was that 12.04 only has 1.12 which doesn't accept --'s infront of it's flags
[01:10] <gary_poster> hatch, gotcha.  You'll probably still want more recent, but maybe that is OK
[01:11] <hatch> yeah it's upgrading now
[01:11] <gary_poster> cool
[01:11] <hatch> we'll see if it bombs
[01:11] <gary_poster> such optimism :-)
[01:11] <hatch> lol I know right?
[01:15]  * hatch crosses fingers
[01:15] <hatch> well it didn't totally bomb
[01:16] <hatch> I have a desktop...
[01:16] <hatch> sortof
[01:16] <hatch> yeah this upgrade didn't go well
[01:23] <hatch> looks like it's an issue with parallels
[01:23] <hatch> *sigh*
[01:31] <hatch> yeah this vm is destroyed
[01:34] <hatch> I guess parallels does not do Ubuntu upgrades very well
[01:34] <hatch> *rainbow* The more you know */rainbow*
[01:37] <gary_poster> heh
[01:38] <gary_poster> hey huwshimi, looking at your branch.  haven't qa'd yet, but noticed that you removed yui3-g classes and friends from everywhere except https://codereview.appspot.com/13352047/diff/1/app/templates/service-configuration.handlebars?column_width=80 .  Why not there?
[01:49] <gary_poster> huwshimi, qa good.  address my question and then land it, please!
[01:53] <huwshimi> gary_poster: Ah, Did you happen to move those controls? I thought I had changed them but then I had a conflict in a merge (I thought at the time they were moved).
[01:53] <gary_poster> huwshimi, yes, I did
[01:54] <huwshimi> gary_poster: Ah, I thought I was going loopy :)
[01:54] <huwshimi> Fixing now
[01:54] <gary_poster> huwshimi, sorry. :-) I was trying to keep the structure similar between the constraints and config
[01:54] <huwshimi> gary_poster: It's all good :)
[01:54] <gary_poster> thanks :-)
[02:06] <gary_poster> huwshimi, you saw manage.jujucharms.com has your updates?
[02:06] <huwshimi> gary_poster: Ooh! Must have happened overnight!
[02:07] <gary_poster> huwshimi, yup :-)
[02:07] <gary_poster> we're the magic elves for your side of the world, and vice versa :-)
[02:08] <gary_poster> Kapil complemented it
[02:08] <huwshimi> :)
[11:00] <gary_poster> Thanks for replying to Peter, bac
[11:01] <gary_poster> hm, bac is not hre
[11:01] <rick_h_> he's hiding
[11:01] <gary_poster> :-)
[11:55] <hatch> morning
[11:55] <hatch> day 2 @ 6am
[11:57] <gary_poster> heh
[11:58] <ahasenack> gary_poster: hi, quick question, where is the export button in the new gui? I'm on http://comingsoon.jujucharms.com/
[11:58] <ahasenack> gary_poster: or is it not there? Export as a "bundle" to use with juju-deployer
[11:59] <gary_poster> ahasenack, functionality currently is only exposed as hotkey.  button coming later.  shift-d exports. (shift-/ , or '?', will show hotkeys)
[11:59] <ahasenack> gary_poster: ah, thanks
[12:00] <gary_poster> welcome
[12:27]  * bac is saucy-fied
[12:28]  * bac and wonders why juju is installed in such a dumb place
[12:39] <hatch> I attempted to do that last night and borked my vm
[12:39] <hatch> I blame gary_poster - he peer pressured me to do it
[12:39] <gary_poster> :-P :-)
[12:40] <gary_poster> hey bac.  thanks for replying to Peter
[12:40] <bac> hatch: but you did take a snapshot?
[12:40] <bac> hatch: mine went without a hitch
[12:41] <hatch> bac: nope I didn't have a spare 20gigs :/
[12:41] <hatch> poor decision on my part
[12:41] <bac> oh
[12:42] <hatch> this weekend I will set up a new one and update our hacking docs
[12:42] <hatch> as I'm sure they are horribly out of date
[12:42] <bac> hatch: that's a mighty positive spin on it.  :)
[12:43] <hatch> haha - well there has been a ton of changes in the environments and I haven't seen any changes coming through on the hacking docs
[12:44] <bac> i am a bit underwhelmed with the saucy background.  i force myself to use the release-branded one so i can easily tell my vms apart but this one is terribly boring.  i'm going to miss that little ringtail.
[12:47] <gary_poster> hey hatch, does this mean you can't do reviews? :-) If not, would appreciate a review of https://codereview.appspot.com/13373052/
[12:49] <hatch> gary_poster: I can, I am just working from my laptop so things are a little slower to build
[12:49] <hatch> reviewing
[12:49] <hatch> even with all the peer pressure I wouldn't have done that upgrade without a viable backup to work from :D
[12:49] <gary_poster> ack, thanks hatch.  I have a lot of small reviews coming down the pike today.  trying to make small targeted branches that are easier to review, but that means I'll be bothering people a lot.
[12:49] <gary_poster> I mean, more than usual ;-)
[12:49] <hatch> haha
[12:50] <hatch> no problem - I just finished the changes ben wanted me to make to my branch so that should be landing soon after a big qa again
[12:51] <hatch> nice improvements to the branch
[12:51] <gary_poster> awesome
[13:04] <hatch> qa'ing in IE now
[13:11] <hatch> gary_poster: so your branch is lgtm but conflict ux is broken in IE on trunk
[13:11] <gary_poster> hatch, before and after my branch?
[13:11] <hatch> before and after yes
[13:12] <hatch> the little dropdown never shows up
[13:12] <gary_poster> hatch ack.  Do you object to me landing as is?  I have a train of branches I'm trying to...uh, bring to the, uh...station.
[13:13] <hatch> lol
[13:13] <hatch> nope I lgtm'd
[13:13] <hatch> but I'll create a high priority card for the ie fix
[13:13] <gary_poster> ok thanks hatch, perfect
[13:15] <hatch> done and done
[13:19] <hatch> lol I just got an email from Air Canada
[13:19] <hatch> ""Double your Aeroplan Miles: fly to Beijing, Shanghai, and Hong Kong!""
[13:19] <hatch> OH OK NO BIG DEAL!!!!
[13:19] <hatch> lol
[13:25] <rick_h_> hatch: got a sec? I had to change the id of the checkbox inputs and now the slider doesn't work. I'm looking at the css and not seeing how the id comes into play
[13:27] <hatch> sure, couple minutes, just need to get this branch re-proposed
[13:27] <rick_h_> hatch: rgr
[13:31] <hatch> ok ready
[13:37] <hatch> I'm pretty confident that the reason phantom always crashes is because we are running too much stuff to the console
[13:37] <hatch> so if we switch to a different output and somehow stop it from showing all of the 'GET' requests
[13:37] <hatch> it should stabilize it
[13:38] <rick_h_> I've not had phantom crash
[13:39] <rick_h_> what does it crash during? test-debug or something?
[13:39] <hatch> yeah - but if I run it in the background it works 100% of the time
[13:39] <rick_h_> ah, maybe. I've not had it happen :/
[13:39] <hatch> so that's my theory
[13:39] <hatch> I remember jc was also having a similar problem
[13:45] <gary_poster> jujugui, could someone please review https://codereview.appspot.com/13348056 ?  It is another juju-gui databinding fix branch, fairly small (only one reviewer needed), with some line-by-line comments..
[13:45] <bac> gary_poster: i'm talking to peter about GA.  it looks like they have a new key they'd like us to use
[13:46] <benji> gary_poster: I'll take a look
[13:46] <bac> gary_poster: i think it might be a good time to make the GA key configurable in the charm configs.  we could separate jujucharms.com from other deployments
[13:46] <gary_poster> bac, yeah I saw in some email or other.  As long as we have access I guess it is fine.  Yes, I was thinking the same thing: sounds perfect.  you have the bandwidth for that?
[13:46] <gary_poster> thank you benji
[13:47] <bac> gary_poster: yes, i have not yet started a new task so now would be perfect
[13:47] <gary_poster> ok cool thanks bac
[13:51] <bac> gary_poster: i think we should default to the old GA key but on deployment to jujucharms.com we should switch to the new one.  that's how i'll approach it.
[13:51] <gary_poster> bac, +1
[13:51] <gary_poster> was thinking same
[13:53] <benji> gary_poster: done
[13:54] <gary_poster> benji, thanks.  yeah, I will elaborate on those docs before landing.  I was figuring it out as I went. :-)
[13:56] <benji> :)
[14:05] <sinzui> abentley, adeuring maybe we want to tag charm-tools bugs with "charmworld" I think of charmworld as a stakeholder.
[14:05] <adeuring> sinzui: +1
[14:05] <abentley> sinzui: +!
[14:06] <abentley> +!
[14:06] <abentley> +1
[14:06] <rick_h_> ah crap, note to self. disabled checkboxes do not fire change events...this is important in writing tests. :/
[14:06] <jcastro> gary_poster: I wasn't expecting the new managed site to go up so quickly!
[14:06] <sinzui> adeuring, abentley or charmbrowser, which is the same used by juju-gui
[14:06] <gary_poster> jcastro, but a good thing, yeah?
[14:06] <jcastro> dude absolutely!
[14:07] <gary_poster> cool :-)
[14:07] <jcastro> hey so, are we going to move the redirects to that site? for example https://jujucharms.com/precise/wordpress/
[14:07] <abentley> sinzui: potato potahto.
[14:07] <sinzui> anyone working on the charmworld title metadata problem?
[14:07] <sinzui> I have it is good authority that it will now be spelt potatoe
[14:09] <jcastro> gary_poster: also are you the guy to ping on manage. or is that ale/luca?
[14:10] <gary_poster> jcastro, me for now at least
[14:10] <jcastro> ok so so far I think it's just the redirects that are weird
[14:10] <jcastro> like go here: http://manage.jujucharms.com/charms/precise/appflower
[14:11] <jcastro> and then drop the "manage" and then you'll see what happens
[14:12] <rick_h_> ugh, bug there. -HEAD-1 oops
[14:12] <jcastro> well, are we even supposed to be sending people to the GUI now?
[14:12] <jcastro> or the static pages? 
[14:12] <jcastro> I thought static pages?
[14:15] <gary_poster> jcastro, first, that doesn't sound like a manage.jujucharms.com yeah?  You are talking about jujucharms.com redirects?
[14:16] <jcastro> yeah
[14:16] <hatch> jujugui I'm still looking for an in depth qa of https://codereview.appspot.com/13373050/
[14:16] <jcastro> ok so basically, when I'm telling people "hey man check out our wordpress charm" we're sending them to manage. right?
[14:16] <jcastro> not the gui?
[14:17] <gary_poster> second, https://jujucharms.com/precise/appflower works great now fwiw and afaict.
[14:17] <sinzui> adeuring, I tagged several charm-tools bugs with charmbrowser.
[14:17] <jcastro> right, but my question is, which is the "canonical" page for a charm on the web?
[14:17] <gary_poster> short term, the urls in m.j.c are supposed to eventually match the j.c ones (so you don't have to include "charms")
[14:18] <adeuring> sinzui: ack
[14:18] <jcastro> gary_poster: ie do I send people links to jujucharms.com or manage.j.u.c ?
[14:19] <gary_poster> jcastro, short term, I think we want https://jujucharms.com/precise/appflower to be canonical.  Soon, from orange squad IIUC (but this is up to mramm), that will proxy m.j.c if your browser can't cut it.  long term the plan is to eliminate both of these and have everything live in one place, currently proposed as juju.ubuntu.com.  That's not till post SFO though
[14:20] <jcastro> ok gotcha!
[14:25] <hatch> jcastro: can people who work for Canonical enter the charm championship?
[14:28] <rick_h_> hatch: looking at it
[14:29] <jcastro> hatch: nope, sorry
[14:30] <rick_h_> jujugui looking for two reviews + qa https://codereview.appspot.com/13516044/ 
[14:30] <rick_h_> doh, guess I better resolve conflicts first
[14:30] <hatch> jcastro: booo!
[14:30] <gary_poster> heh
[14:31] <hatch> what if I got my mom to submit it?
[14:31] <hatch> :P
[14:32] <hatch> jk
[14:34] <hatch> rick_h_: reviewing
[14:34] <rick_h_> hatch: down to the last of 4 conflicts atm
[14:34] <rick_h_> so watch out
[14:34] <hatch> ohh ok I haven't gotten that far
[14:34] <hatch> will wait
[14:35] <hatch> how did you propose with conflicts in the branch?
[14:35] <hatch> or did you just forget to merge trunk
[14:35] <hatch> wait...so did I
[14:35] <rick_h_> hatch: I didn't merge trunk this morning
[14:35] <hatch> heh oops
[14:36] <rick_h_> and you all were busy yesterday :P
[14:37] <hatch> haha yeah that diff was huge
[14:37] <rick_h_> re-lboxing
[14:42] <hatch> more haswell in Lenovo laptops http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/11/lenovo-thinkpad-business-notebooks-haswell
[14:42] <hatch> and in untypical Lenovo fashion they are actually going to be available within a few months of the release date
[14:42] <hatch> lol
[14:46] <hatch> unfortunately comments don't carry forward from the previous revisions so rick_h_ all of your comments are gone :(
[14:46] <rick_h_> oh son...
[14:47] <rick_h_> well, they're in the comment history and the links still work
[14:47] <rick_h_> will have to go with it
[14:47] <rick_h_> I tried reviewers!
[14:47] <hatch> yeah it's just unfortunate
[14:55] <abentley> sinzui, adeuring, jcsackett: I've updated canonistack-sshuttle so that it only needs an environments.yaml with correct auth data.
[14:55] <sinzui> sweet.
[15:03] <hatch> rick_h_: I was under the impression that the conflict ux reacted to elements already in the DOM
[15:03] <hatch> so that the 'skip conflict' thing wouldn't be necessary
[15:04] <rick_h_> hatch: no, there's two things of conflict. One is the conflict-pending, another is conflict itself
[15:04] <rick_h_> one shows the ! 
[15:04] <rick_h_> the other shows the chooser
[15:04] <rick_h_> the chooser is html already in the dom hidden by default
[15:04] <rick_h_> the ! is added/removed as required
[15:04] <hatch> ahh ok - so what handles the ! stuff?
[15:04] <rick_h_> for other inputs the ! is a background image
[15:04] <rick_h_> for checkboxes it's a custom div
[15:05] <rick_h_> hatch: so it's part of the change/conflict methods in conflict mixin
[15:05] <rick_h_> hatch: that was updated last week to support checkboxes, this just tweaks them
[15:05] <rick_h_> to be in the right place wit the correct smaller image now
[15:05] <hatch> ohh ok so it's not part of databinding it's handled by the mixin called from the databinding
[15:05] <rick_h_> hatch: rgr
[15:09] <rick_h_> hatch: is there a feature flag for the relations stuff?
[15:09] <hatch> nope it just works
[15:09] <hatch> or should ;)
[15:09] <rick_h_> hatch: I don't see the tab 
[15:09] <rick_h_> oh duh...ignore me
[15:10] <hatch> *phew*
[15:10] <hatch> I want that darn branch to land already
[15:10] <rick_h_> hatch: k, well review feedback is in. I'm doing qa work now
[15:11] <rick_h_> hmm, make clean-all to the resuce hopefully
[15:16] <hatch> after all the bzr colo issues you have I'm pretty glad I don't do that :)
[15:16] <rick_h_> hatch: can we toss an initial "no current relations" or something in the tab? I thought it was broken at first
[15:16] <rick_h_> hatch: heh, well turns out that the tab is just empty by default and I thought it was broken
[15:16] <rick_h_> so the make clean-all wasn't necessary
[15:16] <hatch> Yeah I have no objection to that but we don't have UX for it so I'd like to add that in the follow-up ux branch
[15:16] <hatch> in fact, I think it's necessary :)
[15:18] <rick_h_> yea, I understand now that I've gotten it to work. Threw me off at first. It's visible by default by nothing that says what it is. Not even a "Relations" heading or something 
[15:18] <rick_h_> I think if it lands it needs to say 'something'
[15:21] <hatch> yeah actually the design is clearly wrong - it should have some indication as to what that icon means
[15:22] <hatch> I'll add a 'Relations' heading by default
[15:23] <rick_h_> hatch: thanks, would help. Qa'ing in Go now
[15:25]  * hatch crosses fingers
[15:26] <hatch> hopes his time reading Go source and writing the go simulator was done properly
[15:34] <rick_h_> hatch: so there's a 'always on' relation for mysql. interface mysql-ha, peer relation
[15:34] <rick_h_> hatch: so that has no heading since it's not related to another service
[15:34] <hatch> hmm
[15:34] <hatch> lemme see if I can repro in the simulator
[15:34] <rick_h_> hatch: rgr, I didn't see it in the normal sandbox qa
[15:35] <hatch> hmm nope
[15:35] <hatch> so why the difference I wonder...
[15:35] <hatch> and so it just shows the relation data but no Header?
[15:36] <rick_h_> hatch: right, I can screenshare if you want to see what I see
[15:36] <rick_h_> hmm, now mssql is in error state and I can't resolve/retry my way out of it :/
[15:37] <hatch> that's not an issue of the branch though right?
[15:37] <rick_h_> no, just stuck now. bah. 
[15:37] <hatch> :/ darn
[15:38] <rick_h_> bah, have to destroy the env and start over
[15:38] <hatch> when you can...could you open up viewlets/service-relations.js with this mysql and dump the `relations` object on line 40? I think I can just do a check for the service and if 'peer' then update with the current service name or something
[15:38] <hatch> oh darn....sorry :)
[15:39] <rick_h_> I'll see what I can do, but we don't have a good way to run debug from the charm atm
[15:39] <rick_h_> so opening the file won't do me much good
[15:39] <hatch> ohhh right damn
[15:39] <hatch> hmm
[15:39] <rick_h_> I can try to app.db.services()...?
[15:39] <hatch> ohh right ok umm
[15:39] <hatch> one sec I'll craft a line
[15:41] <hatch> Y.juju.views.utils.getRelationDataForService(app.db, app.db.services.item(?????));
[15:41] <hatch> ^ rick_h_ where the ???'s are you'll need to enter the appropriate index #
[15:41] <hatch> likely 0 if you only have mysql out there
[15:42] <rick_h_> hatch: 1 because of the gui service itself
[15:42] <hatch> oh right
[15:42] <rick_h_> hatch: will try it out once I get the gui back up and pointed back at your branch, takes a few min
[15:42] <hatch> yeah no rush
[15:43]  * gary_poster observes hatch and rick_h_ playing dueling banjos with their branch reviews :-)
[15:43] <hatch> lol
[15:44] <hatch> rick_h_: you added comments to two different patch sets lol
[15:44] <hatch> I was like 'where the heck are these other comments?'
[15:44] <rick_h_> hatch: I give up...
[15:44] <rick_h_> hatch: I just went in and hit 'start review' then went back into individual files for follow up. e.g. didn't make comments on missing tests until I got done and saw the tests didn't apepar
[15:45] <rick_h_> appear...man is today Monday or what?!
[15:45] <hatch> could be!
[15:50] <gary_poster> jujugui call in 10
[15:54] <rick_h_> hatch: let's hang after the call for the qa stuff. That line won't work and i'm trying to find another way to get that for you
[15:55] <rick_h_> hatch: but mysql won't deploy correctly anyway so I wonder if there's a better qa example I can run
[15:55] <rick_h_> and I wonder if there's a bug in this resolve/retry stuff
[15:55] <hatch> ohh - umm you could use anything really
[15:56] <hatch> I was using mysql because I could get a list of relations
[15:56] <hatch> so what else can have multiple relations...hmm
[15:56] <rick_h_> yea, will check out others. I like mysql because of this special relation that's showing
[15:58] <hatch> yeah that's a good find - I'm curious as to why it doesn't show up in the simulator
[15:58] <hatch> we should find THAT out first
[15:58] <gary_poster> jujugui call in 2
[15:58] <hatch> bcsaller: any idea ^ ?
[15:59] <hatch> I just realized that I pointed you to a 20min convo...
[15:59] <hatch> ignore it, I'll explain after the call :)
[15:59] <bcsaller> ahh, ok
[15:59] <hatch> umm i think guichat is broken
[15:59] <rick_h_> man, I can't deploy elasticsearch
[15:59] <hatch> This party is over...
[15:59] <rick_h_> hatch: yea, got the same thing
[15:59] <bcsaller> fun while it lasted
[16:00] <benji> gary_poster: uh oh: "This party is over..."
[16:00] <hatch> darn so you can't keep links anymore :(
[16:00] <rick_h_> call https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/c989444bba77a138fe2d2ba091887b7dea5739a1 for now 
[16:01] <gary_poster> huh
[16:01] <BradCrittenden> er?
[16:01] <gary_poster> BradCrittenden, see link from rick_h_ 
[16:15] <bac> so is tinyurl.com/jujugui dead?  if so, can we relink it?
[16:16] <gary_poster> bac, it is dead, and no, I don't think tinyurl.com lets you repoint (unless you pay money, maybe?  some systems are like that).  doublechecking...
[16:17] <bac> doesn't matter much.  we just need a persistent hangout url we can bookmark
[16:19] <gary_poster> hey jujugui, anybody have decent RoR experience?
[16:19] <bcsaller> not much more than HelloWorld
[16:21] <hatch> same
[16:21] <hatch> I know a guy...
[16:21] <bcsaller> I know django, same thing, different language 
[16:22] <rick_h_> hah
[16:22] <hatch> lol
[16:27] <gary_poster> jujugui, guichat is dead, long live guichat: http://tiny.cc/guichat
[16:27] <gary_poster> I can edit that if Google kicks us off again in the future
[16:27] <hatch> :'(
[16:28] <gary_poster> tinyurl does not allow you to edit
[16:29] <hatch> rick_h_: did you create the bug or would you like me to? (re peer relations in fakebackend)
[16:30] <rick_h_> hatch: I did not create a bug
[16:32] <gary_poster> jujugui, another small databinding branch ready for review: https://codereview.appspot.com/13663043 .  I would appreciate someone running tests in IE 10; my test might suffer from the problem hatch reported there.
[16:32]  * gary_poster goes for some lunch
[16:56] <hatch> rick_h_: bcsaller both of you mentioned the 'hacks' to get around the tests which were trying to be 'unit' tests but were really integration tests
[16:56] <hatch> so...should I make the tests true integration tests?
[16:57] <hatch> there are quite a few
[16:57] <hatch> will probably push this branch out at-least another day or two
[16:57] <rick_h_> hatch: yea, how many are 'quite a few'? I was hoping it'd be a matter of updating setup/teardown
[16:57] <hatch> unfortunately no :(
[16:57] <rick_h_> hatch: though there were several different places it looked like
[16:57] <hatch> I agree the tests should be fixed
[16:58] <rick_h_> hatch: so yea, I think fixing the tests is important. The thing that is the silent failure potential otherwise. 
[16:58] <hatch> how about....I tag each 'if bloick' which was a hack so that a quick follow-up could be done to fix it properly
[16:58] <hatch> yeah that's a good point
[16:58] <rick_h_> hatch: if they console.error or something I'd be more likely to say short term ok
[16:58] <rick_h_> I just get nervous that there's a silent "it worked" and leads to a really tough bug to find later on
[16:58] <bcsaller> console.error makes more sense than adding a day to the branch
[16:58] <hatch> ok that's good - so console.error and a flag to make it easy to track down
[16:59] <rick_h_> hatch: I can get on board with that
[16:59] <hatch> rick_h_: yup that's very true - it would be very hard to find haha
[17:19] <hatch> rick_h_:  I have no idea how the heck you commented on two different patch sets lol
[17:19] <rick_h_> hatch: I told you how 
[17:20] <hatch> right but that's funny
[17:21] <rick_h_> Yea, lesson learned there. Some times the linear process of reitveld makes for fun
[17:21] <hatch> Its too bad it doesn't appear to be under development any longer
[17:21] <hatch> it's so close to being awesome
[17:22] <rick_h_> we could try out reviewboard :P
[17:22] <rick_h_> very active dev there /me is a fan
[17:22] <hatch> never heard of it
[17:22]  * hatch checks
[17:22] <hatch> hmm does look pretty nicely featured
[17:23] <hatch> does it work with bzr diffs?
[17:23] <hatch> I can't seem to find a y/n
[17:23] <rick_h_> think so, I have not tried it. 
[17:24]  * hatch adds to list of "things to never get to because there isnt' enough time even though he wants to look at"
[17:24] <gary_poster> thank you very much rick_h_ 
[17:32] <rick_h_> gary_poster: np
[17:59] <hatch> gary_poster: in hangout, whenever you're ready
[18:28]  * benji is begining to enjoy sending multi-dozen page faxes to the bank.
[18:28]  * benji looks into Stockholm syndrome treatment options.
[18:33] <hatch> benji: buying a house?
[18:33] <benji> hatch: trying to sell one (short sale)
[18:35] <hatch> oh interesting - I didn't know what a short sale was
[18:52]  * hatch is curious how the topology relation test file is only 116 lines when the topology relation file is 1137 :)
[18:55] <rick_h_> http://www.seejohncode.com/2012/03/13/setting-up-mocha-jscoverage/
[18:56] <hatch> rick_h_: I think we have an architectural problem with our tests that I"m not entirely sure how to solve....but I think a 'mock' factory is a good start
[18:56] <rick_h_> hatch: example?
[18:56] <rick_h_> e.g. I didn't 100% follow that last statement
[18:57] <rick_h_> or not e.g., translation something
[18:57] <hatch> so say I want to test that I can remove a relation
[18:57] <rick_h_> rgr
[18:57] <hatch> or that a method removes a relation from the db
[18:57] <rick_h_> doorbell, sec
[18:57] <hatch> so in my test I would push something into the db, then execute that method and see if it's gone
[18:58] <hatch> but what's happening now is that to do this properly I need two services and properly constructed relation
[18:58] <hatch> so I'd need to mock that in every test suite that I need this in
[18:58] <hatch> what I should be able to do is something like
[18:58] <hatch> services = mymocks.createRealService();
[18:58] <hatch> mymocks.createRealRelation(services)
[18:59] <hatch> because in so many places in our tests we are creating local mocks with only the required data
[18:59] <hatch> so the mocks can get stale, or if something changes, it needs to be changed everywhere
[19:00] <rick_h_> right, so in python we'd have factory helpers makeService(), makeCharm() and maybe helpers like makeRelation(service, service2) etc
[19:01] <rick_h_> and then those factory helpers would have cfg options to set/adjust things as required so that you can put in the data you care about, and fake the rest
[19:01] <hatch> exactly
[19:02] <hatch> right now I'm looking at creating a test that removes a relation and it's just a *groan* activity because I have to make all these mocks
[19:02] <rick_h_> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju-jitsu/charmworld/trunk/view/head:/charmworld/testing/factory.py in charmworld
[19:02] <rick_h_> hatch: so yea, so two parts. 1) is the code setup in a way in which you can hit the method directly and if not, can it be. e.g. a single function call that takes the two services or something
[19:03] <rick_h_> hatch: and then 2) a mock helper that we stick into a test utils module that can help along the lines of a factory
[19:04] <hatch> AND we also have a lot of functions which are......multipurpose..... :)
[19:04] <hatch> makes them hard to test
[19:04] <rick_h_> hatch: but this is exactly why I want to keep events/viewlets self contained. Just objects I can init/call/test. I don't want to have to keep creating mock environments, stores, dbs, etc. 
[19:04] <rick_h_> too often it is a giant pain
[19:04] <rick_h_> hatch: yea, so some of it is that whole design with tests from the start so that you end up breaking things up nicer to be able to test
[19:04] <rick_h_> and some of it is adding in the helpers to make it easier as well
[19:05] <rick_h_> it'll always be easier to test a single function I can pass in a couple of custom objects to, than to have to create those objects, stick them in a db, update some db state, and then call some other object.doSomething()
[19:05] <hatch> well you need integration tests
[19:06] <rick_h_> and doSomething looks in the db, vs just doSomethign(obj1, obj2) and the call is this.doSomething(db.find(1), db.find(2))
[19:06] <hatch> there is a thought in testing that you should never unit test
[19:06] <rick_h_> hatch: yea, this isn't against any of that
[19:06] <hatch> a line of thinking I mean
[19:06] <hatch> I don't think I agree you can be so black& white about it
[19:06] <hatch> can't*
[19:08] <rick_h_> yea, it's not black/white. I tend to go larger than a unit, but I do find that there's smaller blocks than we typically use that would work. 
[19:08] <rick_h_> the widgets/view stuff in the browser I'm a big fan of. Test widget will fire event X with payload Y when you do Z. 
[19:08] <rick_h_> then go test the view, given an event payload of Z, verify that the view will do A and B
[19:09] <rick_h_> trying to instantiate the widget, the view, the model, the store, etc...in one test is a pita and you'll end up skipping over giant swaths of cases
[19:10] <rick_h_> hatch: if you want to pair on something specific I'd love look at it and see if I can suggest anything. Maybe we can start a factory helper. 
[19:10] <rick_h_> hatch: if not, cool. I agree with your general concensus/idea
[19:10] <hatch> we need a sprint
[19:10] <hatch> where we tackle modules and get 100% test coverage and proper splitting upping of the functions :)
[19:12] <rick_h_> yea, I'd love to get coverage working. Maybe I'll try to do that as a slack thing. At least to get some ideas of where we're at. 
[19:12] <rick_h_> that js coverage module seems kind of a pain as it wants to be setup per directory or something, will have to try it out
[19:12] <hatch> you'llprobably cry
[19:12] <hatch> ;p;
[19:12] <rick_h_> oh, I already do :P
[19:13] <rick_h_> but I do the same things. All too often I only add a test for the success case and I've got to stop doing that.
[20:39] <hatch> bcsaller: still around?
[20:39] <bcsaller> yeah
[20:39] <bcsaller> whats up?
[20:39] <hatch> just proposing that branch right now so would love a follow-up
[20:40] <hatch> hopefully to get the darn thing landed
[20:40] <hatch> all of the code paths are 'tested' but there is no way to know that....we really need to develop a better testing strategy
[20:41] <hatch> I call for a few remote beerz discussion about it some time :)
[20:41] <hatch> or maybe in....whatever city the sprint is in lol
[20:43] <hatch> ok it's done proposing
[20:52] <hatch> ^ bcsaller
[20:52] <bcsaller> hatch: looking for the link now
[20:52] <hatch> woops sorry https://codereview.appspot.com/13373050/
[20:52] <hatch> thought it would have emailed
[21:10] <hatch> bcsaller: thanks for the review and sorry about missing that - I meant to move that into the service
[21:13] <bcsaller> hatch: np
[21:18] <hatch> submittin!
[21:18] <hatch> although I have two followups so I'm not really out of the woodwork yet
[21:18] <hatch> hah
[21:18] <rick_h_> looking now hatch 
[21:20] <hatch> a new branch will immediately be created for the unit aggregation
[21:20] <hatch> which will add some normalization and more tests
[21:20] <hatch> well immediately being in the AM because it's past EOD and I have a bunch of stuff to do tonight
[21:20] <hatch> :)
[21:21] <hatch> I'm really going to work hard on doing TDD and small branches
[21:21] <hatch> need to land things after a dayish
[21:21] <hatch> these long runners just kill forward momentum
[21:21] <rick_h_> don't go too crazy. I find pure TDD tends to end up with bad apis, but definitely smaller/jumps
[21:21] <hatch> did you read my TDD blog post?
[21:22] <hatch> I like that approach
[21:22] <rick_h_> hatch: yea, that was a while back I think. 
[21:22] <hatch> yeah
[21:22] <hatch> I find it's a more common sense approach to tdd
[21:22] <rick_h_> coolio
[21:23] <hatch> I'm also downloading 13.04 so I can hopefully start working on my desktop again soon hah
[21:24] <hatch> laptop is great but man I need moa powa!
[21:24] <rick_h_> yea, I can understand that
[21:24] <rick_h_> hatch: so I'm looking this over and cool. I see the new test for the model initializer, the one that hits the bound event *add. 
[21:25] <rick_h_> I don't see anything for the large swath of process_delta or large, very if riddled getServicesFromDelta?
[21:25] <hatch> ugh I know! I spent forever stepping through various tests and it has pretty good code coverage
[21:25] <rick_h_> some of that is moved code I guess, are there real tests hitting that already I'm not looking at?
[21:25] <hatch> from a swath of different tests across the app
[21:26] <rick_h_> I know in my last branch I tried to go through and get things working, then did a -wip -cr so I could see the diff. Then tried to make sure I added/noted a test for each chunk in the diff (other than css/etc obviously) 
[21:26] <rick_h_> just a fyi, this is how I'm going through and reviewing is looking for the changes in one window, and looking for the tests in the others
[21:27] <hatch> right so the issue is that there is no way looking at the code to know where it's being testsed
[21:27] <hatch> we need some way to figure that out
[21:27] <rick_h_> k
[21:28] <rick_h_> hatch: ok, replied. Got a LGTM with a note/two
[21:29] <hatch> this relation code is tested from so many different integration tests
[21:29] <hatch> this will be my new thing
[21:29] <hatch> to figure out a proper approach to this
[21:29] <rick_h_> ok, as I said. I'll take the word on it. I just get nervous as we had some recent relations breakages and such lately
[21:30] <hatch> rick_h_: the null is object test issue was with `typeof` not isObject
[21:30] <hatch> just FYI
[21:30] <rick_h_> hatch: ah, ok. 
[21:30] <hatch> isObject has an isNull check
[21:30] <hatch> I looked ;)
[21:31] <rick_h_> hatch: well still, a check that you got an object seems a bit weak, but that's cool then. It was the big way I could see for it to pass wrongly. 
[21:31] <hatch> oh no that's all it needs to be
[21:31] <rick_h_> gotcha, k
[21:31] <hatch> yeah it's just a 'trigger' to tell databinding that it's changed
[21:32] <hatch> so I figured sending the change object made the most sense
[21:32] <hatch> as it will always be different
[21:32] <hatch> so 'change' will fire
[21:32] <rick_h_> right, but my first instinct was that you'd check that the object sent was the one received. 
[21:32] <hatch> (perfect place for a reviewer comment)
[21:32]  * rick_h_ closed the window...sec
[21:32] <rick_h_> lol
[21:33] <rick_h_> ok, well I've got to go finish dinner. Hopefully that unblocks you. Didn't want to carry it overnight if I could help it
[21:33] <hatch> yup i'll add more tests with the new stuff tomorrow
[21:33] <hatch> but smaller branches
[21:33] <hatch> smaller branches
[21:33] <hatch> the way of the future...
[21:33] <hatch> the way of the future...
[21:33] <hatch> the way of the future...
[23:30] <hatch> well got the new vm up and running but man it's slow for some reason
[23:33] <hatch> appears to be related to the new UI effects
[23:38] <bcsaller> is the VM not GPU accelerated?
[23:39] <hatch> I'm not sure - it's doing the updates now, will see if that fixes it
[23:39] <hatch> I'm going to guess the 'parallels tools' didn't install properly or something so it's causing it to not be gpu accelerated
[23:40] <hatch> those 'tools' on any of these vm providers never quite work properly :()
[23:40] <hatch> :)
[23:40] <rick_h_> in virtualbox you need to install the guest additions to get the gpu accel
[23:40] <hatch> yeah so that's my guess is that the tools are not working properly
[23:41] <hatch> other than that the OS feels way faster than 12.04
[23:44] <hatch> oh cool they now have a shell install script for Ubuntu
[23:44] <hatch> someone was thinkin
[23:46] <hatch> pfft ther we go 1Mx better
[23:57] <hatch> I really like the new juju.ubuntu.com
[23:58] <hatch> imho really gets the point across