[04:38] <pitti> Good morning
[06:39] <shrini> elfy: Thanks for merging my test cases
[06:51] <elfy> hi shrini - thanks for doing them :)
[06:52] <elfy> shrini: one quick comment - if there is a bug that you're doing the testcase for - please assign yourself to the bug :)
[06:52] <elfy> bug 1348639
[06:52] <elfy> check that one - you can see where I assigned it to me
[06:53] <shrini> elfy: oh. thanks. will do that
[06:53] <elfy> it's unlikely to happen - but it could be that more than person works on the same thing - and only one will get merged :)
[06:53] <elfy> and you'll get karma :)
[15:43] <om26er> elopio, I wrote helpers for TextArea, its mostly copy paste https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/add_helpers_for_TextArea/+merge/228385
[15:43] <elopio> om26er: I saw a little about it on friday.
[15:43] <elopio> I'll make the full review today.
[15:43] <elopio> what I saw is that you shouldn't duplicate all the tests.
[15:44] <balloons> om26er, awesome :-0
[15:44] <elopio> you can either use scenarios to run the same tests for textfields and textareas
[15:44] <elopio> or you can just write a test that checks that textarea inherits from textfield.
[15:44] <om26er> elopio, one test to rule them all ?
[15:45] <om26er> elopio, well one of the methods couldn't be reused because TextArea does have a clear button
[15:45] <om26er> so it was check for hasClearButton causing failure
[15:46] <elopio> om26er: ok, that's good to know. I think the better strategy is to only test what changes between the base class and the child.
[15:47] <elopio> so one test for clear the text area, and one test to check it inherits from text field is good enough.
[15:48] <elopio> if you want to go the safer route, go with the scenarios solution to run all tests for both
[15:48] <elopio> and you can either skip hasClearButton on textArea, or move it to a textfield specific test case.
[15:48] <elopio> om26er: but as I said, I just gave it a quick look.
[15:48] <elopio> I have it on my todo.
[15:50] <om26er> elopio, I think its fine to just check it inherits and a test for clear.
[15:50] <elopio> om26er: chose whatever you think best. So, please mark it as work in progress, and I'll get an email when it's ready again and review it.
[15:51] <om26er> elopio, done.
[15:51] <om26er> balloons, isn't it :)
[15:57] <pitti> balloons: could you live with http://paste.ubuntu.com/7885946/ ?
[15:59]  * balloons looks
[15:59] <balloons> pitti, yes, I think after we spoke that's the most sane way of doing it
[16:00] <pitti> balloons: it only needs to be specified once, the next run won't need it any more
[16:00] <pitti> but I don't want to penalize all runs by always running it
[16:00] <pitti> balloons: well, it can always be improved later on, but with that one has at least a way to get on
[16:01] <balloons> pitti, right.. could you catch the 404 error automagically?
[16:01] <pitti> balloons: with some heuristics/parsing, I suppose so
[16:02] <pitti> it's not easy to wire between adt-run and the ssh script
[16:06] <balloons> pitti, cool, but probably not the most important thing.. This is simple and gives a nice solution
[16:07] <elfy> afternoon balloons
[16:07] <elfy> and pitti et al
[16:07] <balloons> afternoon elfy
[16:58] <elopio> nice work om26er. I'll approve your text area branch and ask the team to get it merged.
[16:58] <om26er> elopio, thanks
[16:58] <elopio> oh, om26er, one thing.
[16:58] <om26er> hah
[16:58] <elopio> you need to do the mp agains staging.
[16:58] <elopio> *against
[16:58] <elopio> https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-sdk-team/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/staging
[17:01] <om26er> elopio, https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/add_helpers_for_TextArea/+merge/228542
[19:02] <elfy> any testcase admins about - https://code.launchpad.net/~elfy/ubuntu-manual-tests/1348639/+merge/228307
[19:02] <elfy> thanks :)
[19:57] <balloons> elfy, on https://code.launchpad.net/~elfy/ubuntu-manual-tests/1348639/+merge/228307, why do you have extra unmerged revs in there?
[20:01] <elfy> mmm
[20:01] <elfy> no idea :(
[20:01] <elfy> it's bzr ...
[20:03] <balloons> left a comment
[20:04]  * elfy left an answer 
[20:05] <elfy> balloons: I've no idea where those other things have come from - though 279-281 are the Dia thing I merged and synced
[20:05] <balloons> elfy, yea, they are simply revisions from trunk
[20:10] <balloons> elfy, merged and synced
[20:10] <elfy> thanks boss - was the last one I checked
[20:10] <elfy> just been doing them prior to a test call
[20:11] <elfy> that was the last one I needed to change \o/
[20:12] <balloons> :-)
[20:23] <elopio> ubuntu-qa and/or balloons: can I get a review here please? https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/sudoku-app/clean_tests1/+merge/228236
[20:24] <balloons> elopio, that's on my list, but anyone else feel free to jump on it in the interim
[20:24] <elopio> thanks balloons. I hope somebody else jumps. We need more people making reviews.
[20:25] <thomi> elopio: too many whitespace changes :P
[20:27] <thomi> elopio: *ahaaaa*! *now* I know who keeps introducing this 'AppnameApp' anti-pattern :P
[20:27] <elopio> thomi: antipattern? We discussed for a long time about it.
[20:27] <elopio> tell me what don't you like
[20:28] <thomi> it's a nasty hack to work around this bug, which nobody reported till brendand asked us to look at  a test last week: https://bugs.launchpad.net/autopilot/+bug/1348399
[20:28] <thomi> SudokuApp should be a CPC
[20:29] <thomi> otherwise, when you call 'get_root_instance' from elsewhere in the tree you don't get a SudokuApp instance back, and you need to create another one, which is just silly :)
[20:29] <elopio> thomi: oh, I never thought about it as a bug. But anyway, once you fix it, I'll just have to change the base class.
[20:29] <elopio> and not pass the proxy as a parameter. That's nice.
[20:30] <thomi> elopio: yeah
[20:30] <thomi> elopio: anyway :)
[20:30] <elopio> subscribing myself to know when to use it that way.
[20:31] <balloons> interesting bug..
[21:19] <elopio> thomi: do you know if we can launch with upstart an application binary from the build directory?
[21:19] <thomi> elopio: I believe if you create an upstart override file you can
[21:19] <thomi> elopio: I think some of the test suites do that already
[21:19] <thomi> elopio: perhaps maalit?
[21:19] <elopio> thomi: what's that? the desktop file?
[21:19] <thomi> elopio: no
[21:19] <thomi> elopio: veebers knows how to do it
[21:20]  * elopio waits for veebers.
[21:20] <veebers> elopio: hey, hmm I'll have to remember, but we've done it before
[21:20] <veebers> I think unity8 does something like that
[21:20]  * veebers checks
[21:20] <thomi> it's a file in ~/.share/upstart/appname.override (I think), where you can specify an alternate path to launch
[21:22] <veebers> I thought ~/.cache/...
[21:23] <veebers> hmm no, unity8 upstart config allows you to pass BINARY, onto the next example
[21:23] <elopio> ~/.share doesn't exist here. ~/.cache has only the app logs.
[21:24] <veebers> elopio: oh, ~/.config
[21:25] <elopio> veebers: any idea what should I put there?
[21:25] <veebers> elopio: for instance: ~/.config/upstart/maliit-server.override
[21:26] <veebers> elopio: for instance for the maliit one it's putting: "exec maliit-server -testability"
[21:26] <veebers> this might be outdated information though and there may be a better way
[21:29] <elopio> veebers: yes, something like this in dialer-app.override does'nt seem to work:
[21:29] <elopio> exec workspace/canonical/dialer-app/bugs/fix1349582-number_format/src/dialer-app
[21:29] <elopio> veebers: do you know who to ask about this?
[21:30] <veebers> elopio: ted? Perhaps om26er, I'm pretty sure he's used the override stuff before
[21:31] <om26er> veebers, yeah, didn;t try recently but it used to work
[21:31] <om26er> elopio, so you want to start maliit always in testability ?
[21:31] <elopio> om26er: no, I want upstart to start the dialer app from the branch, not the installed one.
[21:34] <om26er> yeah then 'exec $bin'