[03:32] <AndChat|272729> I know this isn't the support channel but when I boot into 15.04  it loads me into the grub command line thing
[03:32] <AndChat|272729> Sorry but for some reason my nickname changed from captonjamason
[14:24] <elopio_> brendand_: you can do it, but it doesn't look nice.
[14:24] <elopio_> it's something like Eventually(Equals(10)).match()
[14:25] <elopio_> you need to put somewhere the first argument, maybe it's inside the match? I can't get that syntax write without looking at the code.
[15:26] <elopio_> vila: so the webbrowser branch is ready to land, right?
[15:26] <elopio_> or do you want to iterate on it a little more?
[15:30] <vila> elopio_: it should be ready
[15:31] <elopio_> oSoMoN: lets talk about https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/webbrowser-app/autopkgtest/+merge/256858 when you have some time.
[15:31] <oSoMoN> elopio_, sure, but not now
[15:31] <oSoMoN> elopio_, please ping me again tomorrow
[15:31] <elopio_> oSoMoN: ack.
[15:37] <elopio_> rhuddie: is it ok if I join you on the card to investigate the install app failure?
[15:37] <rhuddie> elopio_, that would be excellent
[15:38] <rhuddie> elopio_, I just saw your note about same issue on krillin. it is easy to reproduce on emulator.
[15:39] <elopio_> I just saw it once on krillin, in like 30 runs. I have the emulator ready now.
[15:39] <elopio_> rhuddie: thanks for the document about setting it up. We should probably move that info to the wiki.
[15:40] <rhuddie> elopio_, it seems to be an issue with signon dialog process
[15:41] <rhuddie> elopio_, but at least we know that if you have seen the same issue on krillin, then it is not just some weird emulator problem
[15:42] <elopio_> rhuddie: well, if you have it every time on the emulator, then something there is worst.
[16:57] <balloons> elfy, knome re: xubuntu, lol, I noticed EVERYTHING that was new in 4.12. I didn't realize it was all brand new :-) http://www.xfce.org/about/tour
[17:03] <elfy> oh yea - all new and shiny :p
[18:23]  * bip Hello
[18:27] <balloons> hello bip
[18:27] <balloons> come stai?
[18:28] <bip> Hello balloons ;-) Tutto ok
[18:29] <bip> balloons: and you? How are you? :)
[18:30] <balloons> bip, busy busy! it's UOS time, and we're going sessions at the moment
[18:30] <bip> balloons: UOS time? Whats is?
[18:30] <balloons> here's the sessions today: http://summit.ubuntu.com/uos-1505/2015-05-06/
[18:31] <bip> balloons: its' wonderful
[18:31] <bip> balloons: where are you from?
[18:33] <balloons> bip, the US; I'm in Florid
[18:33] <balloons> *Florida
[18:35] <balloons> bip, anyways, UOS is Ubuntu Online Summit. It's an online conference and get together for everyone in the community to talk about ubuntu
[18:36] <balloons> we're talking about lots of different things across several tracks..
[19:02] <Letozaf_> hey balloons when you got time I fixed mp: https://code.launchpad.net/~carla-sella/ubuntu-docviewer-app/test-toc/+merge/258082 I also left a reply on one of your comments
[19:04] <balloons> Letozaf_, ahh, sure, let me have a look
[19:07] <balloons> Letozaf_, some more thoughts. I'm confused about that while loop
[19:09] <Letozaf_> balloons, I will take a look thanks
[19:43] <balloons> Letozaf_, so why do you need that while loop?
[19:44] <Letozaf_> balloons, the first or the second or both ?
[19:44] <balloons> Letozaf_, line 215; +            while (index <= list_items_count):
[19:45] <Letozaf_> balloons, I have to find the chapter in the TOC, so to find it I read all the items one by one
[19:45] <Letozaf_> balloons, and that list_items_count is the number of items in the TOC
[19:46] <balloons> Letozaf_, but aren't you already stepping through the items inside the for loop?
[19:47]  * Letozaf_ is recaping
[19:48] <Letozaf_> balloons, looks like I put it there initially for a purpose and now it's useless, I got the point
[19:48] <balloons> Letozaf_, :-) Ok, just wanted to make sure I'm not crazy ,heh
[19:49] <balloons> have to be careful with loops where you don't change the control variables
[19:49] <Letozaf_> balloons, nooo you're never crazy, maybe I could be lol
[19:50] <Letozaf_> balloons, yes you are right, think I got misled by something
[19:55] <Letozaf_> balloons, I fixed it, think I got misled inserting Stefano's suggestions into mine without checking well first
[19:59] <balloons> cool
[20:00] <Letozaf_> :)
[21:32] <bip> Hello!
[22:19] <elopio_> veebers: can you please look here when you have some time? https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/webbrowser-app/fix_base_class/+merge/256519/comments/644908
[22:20] <elopio_> the only way to keep it working for every individual tests is to add some unused imports.
[22:20]  * veebers looks
[22:22] <veebers> elopio_: hmm, I wonder if the new (unreleased) autopilot fixes this. I'll take a look in a little bit and comment on the MP.
[22:23] <elopio_> veebers: I think not. The problem is that the Browser object is not in the registry.
[22:23] <elopio_> I think I can fix it by moving it from webbrowser_app.emulators to webbrowser_app. Every test needs to import the top name space.
[22:24] <elopio_> it's just a patch though.
[22:25] <elopio_> with the new autopilot we will be able to pass Browser as the base argument when launching, forcing the import. But that also feels wrong because it's not the base of the inheritance hierarchy.
[22:31] <elopio_> veebers: yes, it works puttin in the top namespace.
[22:32] <elopio_> maybe it's not so bad. Maybe the webbrowser_app namespace should declare __all__, and we put the app cpo in there.
[22:50] <veebers> elopio_: hmm, ok. I feel that there should be a better solution that doesn't put the work on the author
[22:53] <elopio_> veebers: I think it's good to tell the author to be explicit about what he wants. Here we have the problem that the registry is implicit and the author has no way to know what's getting in there.
[22:53] <elopio_> if we call the argument in launch something like: application_custom_proxy_object=WebbrowserApp, it's explicit and clear what we want.
[22:54] <elopio_> it makes the registry unnecessary too.
[22:55] <veebers> elopio_: I don't think it makes the registry unnecessary, but it does cleanup how authors get the right thing entered into it when they need.
[22:56] <elopio_> veebers: there's still the case where you launch the app from somewhere else.
[22:56] <elopio_> like when you open the browser from the launcher, the only way to get the right cpo is to do the unused import.
[22:56] <veebers> hmmm
[23:00] <veebers> elopio_: so coming back to your first answer, that it's not in the reg. Is it that it's not in the registry at all or that it's not being applied to the proxy object bases?
[23:01] <elopio_> veebers: it's not in the registry at all. The single test is never hitting the definition of class WebbrowserApp.
[23:03] <veebers> hmmm
[23:13] <veebers> elopio_: oh, FYI we've upgraded the warning in autopilot about the CPO not being base to an error
[23:13] <veebers> This was after working with the addressbook tests
[23:15] <elopio_> veebers: I saw that. Works for me.
[23:19] <veebers> elopio_: what do you think of adding a function like 'register_application_cpo' that makes sure that it's in the registry
[23:20] <veebers> or perhaps a decorator for application CPO classes
[23:20] <veebers> That's really more of a quickfix/bandaid as it doesn't change the behaviour really, but smooths it over a litle
[23:22] <elopio_> veebers: a decorator will still need somebody to import or instantiate that class.
[23:22] <elopio_> register_application_cpo sounds weird but explicit, so that's better in my opinion.
[23:22] <elopio_> I'm thinking of making a lauch class method in the application cpo class.
[23:23] <elopio_> if that's the recommended way of launching it, we will be sure that it is explicitly imported and the registry is an implementation detail the test won't care about.
[23:24] <elopio_> that would leave only the case for when the app is launched externally, which we could solve with something like register_application_cpo.
[23:24] <elopio_> this sounds like another topic to discuss during the sprint with the whole team.
[23:26] <veebers> elopio_: as long as we still have time for it on the sprint :-) I think we have _heaps_ to discuss (which is good, as long as we get through it).
[23:26] <veebers> elopio_:  the intention of the decorator would be to explicity put it in the registry
[23:27] <veebers> (much like what register_app_cpo would do
[23:27] <elopio_> veebers: but when is the decorator executed?
[23:27] <elopio_> when the class is instantiated?
[23:27] <veebers> elopio_: on a class? I'm not to sure, it was an idea that I hadn't thought through to implementation :L-)
[23:27] <elopio_> :)