=== jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === CyberJacob|Away is now known as CyberJacob === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === kickinz1|afk is now known as kickinz1 === CyberJacob is now known as CyberJacob|Away === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver [09:52] rvba, if you want to see my workaround for the BooleanField problem: https://code.launchpad.net/~jtv/maas/bug-1374388/+merge/236291 [09:52] jtv: okay, I'll review this right now. [09:55] Thanks. [10:01] rvba: I'm just pushing some improvements to the comment that explains it all. [10:02] jtv: just approved the branch but I suggested an improvement that could help us generalize this fix, see my inline comment… [10:02] Great. [10:12] rvba: how do I add a field to the UI form without also getting it as part of an API form submission? === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver [10:15] jtv: add a mixin on top of the form that is used in the UI. [10:17] But what form is it that's used in the UI and not in the API? [10:25] jtv: I'm thinking about adding a hierarchy of forms where the UI uses the base form (the one used by the API) + a mixin that add the 'ui-specific' hidden field. [10:26] adds* [10:27] jtv: does that make sense? [10:27] * jtv cringes at the thought of yet more mixins [10:28] I do see the argument against doing it from the templates though. [10:29] We could probably avoid doing this with a mixin… [10:29] We could have this logic (add the 'ui-specific' field) in a base view class. [10:30] i.e. our own version of Django's django.views.generic.edit.ProcessFormView [10:32] How would we make use of that new view? [10:33] I don't see any use of ProcessFormView in our node views at the moment... is a base class for some other class we use? [10:33] Our views NodeListView, etc would derive from it instead of django.views.generic.edit.ProcessFormView. [10:35] What I'm asking is: AFAICT the views for which we need this don't derive from ProcessFormView, so how does this help them? [10:36] UpdateView. That's the one we want, I think? [10:36] The views for which we need this *do* derive from ProcessFormView, but indirectly… [10:36] NodeView → UpdateView → ProcessFormView. [10:37] How do you change the last step in that chain without a mixin? [10:37] I know, this isn't possible without a mixin. [10:37] Right. [10:37] Either we change UpdateView (like you said) or we use a mixin. [10:37] I think UpdateView would be fine — because the problem is specific to model forms. [10:38] True. [10:38] Can we just add a field there and have it show up in UI-originated form submissions? [10:39] Or were you thinking to change get_form_class? [10:39] Well, the view itself isn't the form. It's in charge of building the form. [10:39] Yeah, that's what I had in mind. [10:52] Hello, is someone here who can help me out with creating a custom boot image? [10:58] Ditma: blake_r is probably your best bet right now, but he won't be in yet. [10:58] jtv: allright thanks. I think i will try to contact him later then. [11:00] OK [11:06] allenap: I did have a question about OS support that you might know answers to, actually... any chance of a quick chat? [11:08] jtv: Sure. [11:08] Thanks. === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver [11:21] allenap: conflict in your branch. :( [11:21] jtv: Ta, I’ll fix that. [11:23] Done. === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === kickinz1 is now known as kickinz1|afk === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver [14:08] Is someone online who made some experiences with MAAS and link aggregation? === jfarschman is now known as MilesDenver === mwenning is now known as mwenning-needs-c === mwenning-needs-c is now known as mwenning [15:00] hello all, I'm running into https://bugs.launchpad.net/maas/+bug/1350925 it appears and there's reference for trying the 'release candidate' is there a ppa or something I can get that from? [15:00] Ubuntu bug 1350925 in MAAS "Unable to get RPC connection for cluster 'maas'" [Critical,Incomplete] === bladernr_30kFeet is now known as bladernr_ === matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch === alexpilotti_ is now known as alexpilotti === matsubara-lunch is now known as matsubara === roadmr is now known as roadmr_afk === cmagina_ is now known as cmagina === CyberJacob|Away is now known as CyberJacob === roadmr_afk is now known as roadmr === CyberJacob is now known as CyberJacob|Away === CyberJacob|Away is now known as CyberJacob === CyberJacob is now known as CyberJacob|Away