[21:23] <rogpeppe> thumper: hiya
[21:23] <thumper> morning rogpeppe
[21:23] <thumper> working sunday night?
[21:24] <rogpeppe> carmen's away...
[21:24] <rogpeppe> managed to do a bit of slightly off-piste hacking on saturday
[21:24] <thumper> heh
[21:25] <rogpeppe> result is this CL; review appreciated: https://codereview.appspot.com/13249054/
[21:25] <rogpeppe> there are some cool things that it makes possible
[21:36] <rogpeppe> for instance it's easy to use it to generate API client-side code automatically.
[21:38] <rogpeppe> or to allow API clients to find out what calls are available
[21:59] <rogpeppe> i also think it makes sense just from the p.o.v. of the structuring of the rpc package too, BTW - it becomes less monolithic, and that part (which is a significant part of the rpc package logic) can be more easily tested independently.
[21:59] <rogpeppe> thumper: but YMMV of course
[22:03] <thumper> I'll take a look, but this is somewhat outside my current experience messing with go/juju
[22:16] <rogpeppe> thumper: that's ok, i actually just want you to marvel at this, which took only an hour to write this afternoon, after i thought of it: http://paste.ubuntu.com/6143236/ :-)
[22:17] <rogpeppe> thumper: it generates API client code for our entire API.
[22:18] <rogpeppe> thumper: output looks like this: http://paste.ubuntu.com/6143244/
[22:18] <rogpeppe> thumper: it actually compiles, but i haven't tried using it
[22:19] <thumper> heh
[22:19] <thumper> interesting
[22:20] <rogpeppe> thumper: the text/template package is actually surprisingly powerful
[22:21] <thumper> I don't see why the whole docker thread is on three different mailing lists I'm on
[22:21] <thumper> I get every email three times FFS
[22:22] <rogpeppe> thumper: that's because they're so anxious that you read the mailing lists that they subscribed you three times :-)
[22:23] <thumper> no, I'm on all three lists
[22:23] <thumper> and the email is sent to three different lists
[22:23] <thumper> rogpeppe: are you not getting them three times?
[22:23] <thumper> juju-dev, cdo and cloud?
[22:24] <rogpeppe> to:	 Canonical Clouds <cloud@lists.canonical.com>,
[22:24] <rogpeppe>  cdo@lists.canonical.com,
[22:24] <rogpeppe>  canonical-juju <canonical-juju@lists.canonical.com>
[22:24] <rogpeppe> thumper: i'm not sure
[22:25] <rogpeppe> thumper: my inbox is a mess currentyl
[22:25] <rogpeppe> thumper: well, both my inboxes
[22:25] <thumper> there are two cross list conversations atm
[22:31] <rogpeppe> thumper: i hadn't actually read any of the thread. interesting.
[22:31] <rogpeppe> davecheney: yo!
[22:35] <davecheney> rogpeppe: hey
[23:00] <thumper> wallyworld_: thanks for finishing off that logging branch
[23:00] <wallyworld_> np at all
[23:01] <wallyworld_> was good to get it landed
[23:30]  * thumper got sidetracked starting kvm work fixing lxc tests
[23:31] <wallyworld_> how's the kvm stuff going?
[23:33] <thumper> wallyworld_:  https://codereview.appspot.com/13828043
[23:34] <thumper> wallyworld_: just starting really
[23:34] <wallyworld_> looking
[23:34] <thumper> wallyworld_: I have been focusing primarily on helping you and axw get your things in
[23:34] <thumper> and doing kvm on the side
[23:34] <wallyworld_> thank you :-)
[23:34] <thumper> as it isn't going to make 1.16
[23:34] <thumper> hoping to have it available shortly after
[23:34] <thumper> definitely prior to SFO
[23:34]  * thumper crosses fingers
[23:35] <wallyworld_> mass folks will be happy
[23:35] <wallyworld_> maas
[23:35] <thumper> but I want to make sure that the simplestream tools things and null provider stuff gets in
[23:45] <wallyworld_> thumper: why does the PatchEnvironment  call followup with a call to cleanup but not the SetPatch calls?
[23:45] <thumper> wallyworld_: it is in setup suite
[23:46] <thumper> the PatchEnvironment in the test is a test cleanup
[23:46] <thumper> not a suite cleanup
[23:46] <thumper> I'm yet to decide on wording for the PatchEnvironmentForSuite name
[23:46] <thumper> or PatchValueForSuite
[23:46] <thumper> perhaps those are good enough
[23:49] <wallyworld_> "the PatchEnvironment in the test is a test cleanup"  --- isn't the patch env called from setup suite. i don't quite get what you are saying that it is a test clean up
[23:51] <wallyworld_> with this call "s.PatchValue(&lxcObjectFactory, s.Factory)" is SetupTest, i can't see how the old value is ever restored??? since no cleanup is added
[23:51] <wallyworld_> s/is/in
[23:55] <thumper> ah, the PatchValue is a call on the test
[23:55] <thumper> which automatically adds the cleanup
[23:55] <thumper> see testbase.CleanupSuite
[23:56]  * thumper -> gym