| stokachu | wallyworld: any word on the oracle provider not listed anymore? | 00:39 |
|---|---|---|
| stokachu | s/provider/cloud | 00:39 |
| axw | menn0: any chance of a review on https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/7278? | 01:52 |
| menn0 | axw: looking | 01:55 |
| menn0 | axw: done | 02:05 |
| axw | menn0: awesome, thanks | 02:06 |
| axw | menn0: I've simplified the SetSSHKeys as suggested, but left the other one alone. can you please see if my reply is reasonable? | 02:35 |
| menn0 | axw: all good, thanks. merge away | 02:37 |
| axw | menn0: thanks | 02:37 |
| axw | babbageclunk wallyworld: ready whenever you two are | 02:41 |
| wallyworld | righto | 02:41 |
| * thumper unpicks convoluted code | 02:42 | |
| wallyworld | axw: i'll see you in HO once babbageclunk pings back | 02:43 |
| axw | okely dokely | 02:43 |
| babbageclunk | Sorry guys, was on the phone, finished now | 02:44 |
| babbageclunk | axw, wallyworld: ^ | 02:45 |
| thumper | hmm... | 02:57 |
| thumper | wallyworld: do you have 5 minutes? | 02:57 |
| thumper | this code looks and feels wrong | 02:57 |
| thumper | and I want to double check | 02:57 |
| wallyworld | thumper: sure, just otp with andrew and xtian, soon? | 02:57 |
| thumper | sure, ping when done | 02:57 |
| wallyworld | thumper: free now | 03:44 |
| thumper | wallyworld: 1:1 | 03:44 |
| wallyworld | thumper: sorry, cut you off | 04:00 |
| thumper | nm | 04:01 |
| thumper | was just going to ask if you were ready for karaoke next week | 04:01 |
| anastasiamac | wallyworld: axw: do u know if this is something expected? https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1686585 | 04:23 |
| mup | Bug #1686585: Juju deploy via UI fails on Azure <juju:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1686585> | 04:23 |
| axw | anastasiamac: nope | 04:24 |
| anastasiamac | axw: :D 'nope' = dunno or 'nope'='not expected'? | 04:24 |
| wallyworld | you mean is a failure to dpeloy expectedz? | 04:24 |
| axw | anastasiamac: not expected. it's a bug. | 04:24 |
| axw | what wallyworld said. it would be pretty odd for a basic deploy of mariadb to be expected to fail | 04:25 |
| anastasiamac | wallyworld: yes, mayb under some circumstances we know there could b failures.. kind of like under some circumstance we know we have difficulties ;) | 04:25 |
| wallyworld | us? never :-) | 04:25 |
| anastasiamac | axw: wallyworldyes. this was my expectetation too.. just finding way to flag to u - 'failure' :D | 04:26 |
| * wallyworld saw the bug | 04:27 | |
| axw | anastasiamac: I'll have a look into it after I'm done landing ssh things | 04:28 |
| axw | also gotta do some azure auth changes | 04:28 |
| anastasiamac | axw: awesome \o/ | 04:29 |
| thumper | wallyworld: fyi, there are other tests that make sure you can only use --force with --series | 04:54 |
| thumper | so ... whatever | 04:54 |
| wallyworld | i should have remembered that | 04:55 |
| wallyworld | been a while | 04:55 |
| thumper | so... | 04:55 |
| thumper | much of that other code is bollocks | 04:55 |
| thumper | because it is only valid if force is true and series is passed in | 04:55 |
| wallyworld | yeah | 04:55 |
| thumper | oh well | 04:56 |
| wallyworld | maybe we intended to allow --force without series at one point | 04:56 |
| thumper | so... the LTS case will never happen | 04:56 |
| thumper | yeah... | 04:56 |
| thumper | maybe | 04:56 |
| thumper | I'll leave it that way for now... | 04:56 |
| thumper | but perhaps we should look to fix it later | 04:56 |
| wallyworld | yep | 04:58 |
| thumper | I'll leave a note | 04:58 |
| thumper | wallyworld: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/7285 | 05:08 |
| wallyworld | looking | 05:08 |
| wallyworld | babbageclunk: for tomorrow when you start your day and can't face writing code straight away https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/7286 | 05:10 |
| babbageclunk | wallyworld: I mean, I guess it's net deletion so should be easy right? | 05:12 |
| wallyworld | supposedly | 05:12 |
| wallyworld | cut and paste | 05:13 |
| wallyworld | 99% of it | 05:13 |
| wallyworld | i am still finishing the hand testing | 05:13 |
| wallyworld | thumper: lgtm, just a minor niggle | 05:14 |
| thumper | ta | 05:15 |
| thumper | axw: you have snap install go? | 05:17 |
| anastasiamac | anyone cares if i self-approve a typo fix? https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/7287 | 05:18 |
| thumper | approved | 05:18 |
| anastasiamac | thumper: \o/ tyvm! | 05:21 |
| axw | thumper: yes I have | 05:22 |
| thumper | axw: what do you do about gofmt? | 05:22 |
| thumper | I'm still on 1.6, so I'll move to using the snap | 05:22 |
| axw | thumper: nothing yet, but you can add /snap/go/current/bin to $PATH. gofmt is in there | 05:23 |
| axw | it's just not exposed in /snap/bin | 05:23 |
| thumper | ah | 05:23 |
| thumper | right | 05:23 |
| thumper | or I may just symlink from ~/bin because that's in my path already :) | 05:23 |
| thumper | did you remove the golang package? | 05:23 |
| thumper | or did you have go from source? | 05:24 |
| thumper | wallyworld, menn0: either of you move to the snap from the deb? | 05:24 |
| axw | thumper: depends on the machine. I was mostly building from source before | 05:24 |
| axw | just took it out of my path | 05:24 |
| menn0 | thumper: same for me | 05:24 |
| wallyworld | i'm still using deb | 05:24 |
| thumper | I'm just thinking since /snap/bin is at the end of my PATH | 05:25 |
| thumper | I'll probably have to remove the deb | 05:25 |
| menn0 | actually, i've got a symlink to /snap/bin/go | 05:25 |
| thumper | this is my first snap apart from the live patch | 05:26 |
| thumper | :) | 05:26 |
| thumper | heh... | 05:28 |
| thumper | go 1.8.1 from 'mwhudson' installed | 05:28 |
| axw | anastasiamac: actually, that azure bug has been fixed in 2.2. so I guess it is expected after all :) | 07:26 |
| * axw goes to find the bug # | 07:26 | |
| anastasiamac | axw: nice :) so it's a dupe? these are the best :) | 07:27 |
| axw | anastasiamac: not exactly, just happened to be the same underlying issue | 07:34 |
| axw | anastasiamac: I've just linked it a comment and marked Fix Committed | 07:34 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: hiya | 07:41 |
| wallyworld | hi | 07:42 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: i just ran across a line of code that does nothing, and was wondering if it is intended to do something... | 07:42 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: just asking before i delete it :) | 07:42 |
| wallyworld | sure | 07:42 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: (and your name is on it) | 07:42 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: the line is url.Source = "" | 07:43 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: in cmd/juju/crossmodel/show.go | 07:43 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: around line 66 | 07:43 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: was the intention to remove the source from the string set in c.url ? | 07:44 |
| wallyworld | rogpeppe: it doesn't do nothing does it? it sets the Source to empty | 07:44 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: except it sets it in the local url variable which is immediately discarded | 07:44 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: unless ParseApplicationURL returns a reference to some persistent value, i guess | 07:45 |
| wallyworld | oh i see, no that's a bug | 07:45 |
| wallyworld | but that line will never execute right nw | 07:45 |
| wallyworld | I don't think, as source will always be "" from memory | 07:45 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: why not? it's not possible to specify a source? | 07:45 |
| wallyworld | it's for when we support cross controller cmr | 07:45 |
| wallyworld | the CLI won't let you | 07:46 |
| wallyworld | we only support single controller cmr for now | 07:46 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: at a quick glance, it looks like the url parsing code does support returning a source | 07:46 |
| wallyworld | the Source attr is there for futyre use | 07:46 |
| wallyworld | it does | 07:46 |
| wallyworld | but the CLI errors from memory | 07:47 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: so someone *could* type in a url with a source | 07:47 |
| wallyworld | if you try and create an offer an a different controller to the current one | 07:47 |
| wallyworld | they could but the CLI won't let the get very far | 07:47 |
| wallyworld | this is all WIP | 07:47 |
| wallyworld | behind a feature flag | 07:47 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: ok. shall i just remove that line then? | 07:48 |
| wallyworld | yeah, or i'll fix it as a drive by | 07:48 |
| wpk | babbageclunk: pong | 07:58 |
| wpk | babbageclunk: timezones suck.. | 07:58 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: thanks - i've removed it for now | 07:59 |
| wallyworld | rogpeppe: no worries, thank you | 07:59 |
| axw | wallyworld: did you say something about QA tools and such being moved to git? | 08:19 |
| wallyworld | axw: no | 08:27 |
| wallyworld | i asked heather to file a bug for a CI change | 08:27 |
| axw | wallyworld: ok | 08:32 |
| axw | it would be nice if all our things were together | 08:33 |
| wpk | jam: https://pastebin.canonical.com/186915/ does this look OK to you? Or do we want something more there? | 09:09 |
| === salmankhan1 is now known as salmankhan | ||
| === frankban|afk is now known as frankban | ||
| jam | wpk: looks like a good start. | 10:29 |
| jam | wpk: as we discussed, its probably better to start with a minimal interface that is actually all in use and then grow it as we need to | 10:32 |
| jam | wallyworld: axw: ping if you're around | 12:06 |
| wallyworld | jam: i am somewhat | 12:14 |
| jam | wallyworld: so I'm looking through some of the facade registries, and we're registering the *same* object with multiple versions | 12:14 |
| jam | how can that be correct? | 12:14 |
| jam | if we had the same object, we didn't need a version | 12:14 |
| jam | if we changed the object, then we're violating the old api by exposing it with the new object | 12:15 |
| wallyworld | they're not supposed to be the same - new or changed apis are there | 12:15 |
| wallyworld | which one? | 12:15 |
| jam | all of them that I saw | 12:16 |
| wallyworld | oh application | 12:17 |
| jam | wallyworld: I just sent an email about Application | 12:17 |
| jam | but also SSHClient | 12:17 |
| jam | and others, IIRC | 12:17 |
| wallyworld | from memory, application facade adds new methods | 12:17 |
| jam | MachineManager | 12:17 |
| wallyworld | so the version 3 does use the same object as v4 | 12:17 |
| jam | wallyworld: but it *shouldn't* | 12:17 |
| wallyworld | but v 3 clients don't see the new metjhod | 12:17 |
| jam | wallyworld: it means we're exposing the new method on the old version | 12:17 |
| jam | and things like libjuju | 12:17 |
| jam | will expect it | 12:17 |
| jam | wallyworld: they *see* it, they just don't know to ask for it | 12:18 |
| jam | but something like libjuju will create code that will *fail* against old versions | 12:18 |
| jam | because it expects the api to be there, because 'develop' says that it is | 12:18 |
| wallyworld | that is something that wasn't apparent at all at the time | 12:18 |
| wallyworld | it all works with juju's versioning mechanism | 12:18 |
| wallyworld | but if libjuju imposes other restrictions, we'll meed to change | 12:19 |
| jam | wallyworld: if you have (4, NewMethod), with the code written there you will also have (3, NewMethod) | 12:19 |
| wallyworld | sure, but v3 juju clients won't see it | 12:19 |
| jam | wallyworld: again, if they ask, they see it | 12:19 |
| jam | its there | 12:19 |
| jam | it can be called | 12:19 |
| jam | its exposed | 12:19 |
| wallyworld | and nothing breks | 12:19 |
| jam | you're just assuming nobody ever inspects the api | 12:19 |
| wallyworld | if they inspect it they can use it though | 12:20 |
| wallyworld | they use what they see | 12:20 |
| jam | wallyworld: but then they write code against a version of Juju and it breaks against the real version | 12:20 |
| jam | wallyworld: the point of a versioned API is to *not change* the old version | 12:20 |
| wallyworld | that is true. the assumption was that a it worked for juju clients so would have been ok | 12:21 |
| jam | I'm also a bit surprised we've managed 4 revisions of Application with only 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 | 12:22 |
| jam | not sure where the extra version comes in | 12:22 |
| wallyworld | we reved the facades when we went to 2.0 | 12:22 |
| wallyworld | to avoid 1.x clients accidentally calling 2.x facades | 12:22 |
| wallyworld | so 2.0 juju started with v2 application facade | 12:23 |
| wallyworld | i guess we should fix the facades for 2.2 | 12:24 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld, jam: i'm about to move cookie jars into the jujuclient.ClientStore interface so we don't get tests accidentally creating cookie files. does that seem reasonable to you? | 12:24 |
| jam | rogpeppe: I don't quite have the context to immediately say yes/no, but I'd really like us to move cookie jars to be less of a 'global' thing | 12:25 |
| jam | so steps in that direction sound goo | 12:25 |
| jam | good | 12:25 |
| rogpeppe | jam: yeah, that's what i'm working on currently | 12:25 |
| rogpeppe | jam: cookie jars will be per-controller | 12:25 |
| wallyworld | i guess it will be a new embedded interface | 12:25 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: CookieJar(controllerName) http.CookieJar | 12:26 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: or something like that | 12:26 |
| wallyworld | that's the method, a new interface as well | 12:26 |
| wallyworld | to follow the pattern already in place | 12:26 |
| wallyworld | where ClientStore is composed of other interfaces | 12:27 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: yeah, i guess so | 12:27 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: type CookieStore interface {CookieJar(controllerName string) http.CookieJar} | 12:27 |
| wallyworld | sgtm, ty | 12:28 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: actually, the returned jar needs a Save method, but otherwise the same as http.CookieJar | 12:28 |
| wallyworld | ok | 12:29 |
| jam | rogpeppe: you did the work to allow Runner.Worker() to return the underlying worker? | 12:37 |
| rogpeppe | jam: yeah | 12:37 |
| jam | rogpeppe: bug #1686711 I'm trying to track down our test suite getting a nil panic | 12:38 |
| mup | Bug #1686711: panic() during lease manager <panic> <worker> <juju:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1686711> | 12:38 |
| jam | and it *might* be that Worker() is returning nil without returning an error | 12:38 |
| rogpeppe | jam: you can't reproduce it? | 12:38 |
| jam | rogpeppe: its a random test failure | 12:39 |
| jam | rogpeppe: my guess is that we happen to call a leadership function at exactly the right time while something else is tearing down | 12:39 |
| rogpeppe | jam: i'm pretty sure that the Manager instance isn't nil | 12:40 |
| rogpeppe | jam: if that's what you're thinking | 12:40 |
| jam | rogpeppe: well, Secretary pretty much can't be nil and 'config' isn't a pointer | 12:41 |
| jam | (all places that create it in our code pass in a Config with a valid Secretary | 12:41 |
| jam | if workerInfo.worker was nil it would get returned | 12:42 |
| jam | as long as workerInfo was there | 12:42 |
| rogpeppe | jam: the stack trace shows that the first argument (the receiver) is non-nil | 12:43 |
| rogpeppe | jam: how often is this happening? | 12:44 |
| jam | rogpeppe: not sure, it just rejected a merge request | 12:44 |
| jam | but nil panics in code are serious so worth investigating so that we know they aren't production issues | 12:44 |
| rogpeppe | jam: you've seen it before? | 12:44 |
| jam | rogpeppe: I have not, but it certainly isn't my code that is changing this | 12:45 |
| jam | rogpeppe: and unless you're going with "bit flips due to cosmic rays" its a latent bug in our code | 12:45 |
| rogpeppe | jam: indeed | 12:45 |
| jam | rogpeppe: so the stack trace, Claim() only takes 3 arguments and is a method, but the stack trace shows 8 parameters to the function | 12:47 |
| jam | rogpeppe: is it expanding 'string' objects ? | 12:47 |
| rogpeppe | jam: yeah, that's right | 12:47 |
| jam | rogpeppe: time.duration is only an int64, they're still too many parameters | 12:48 |
| rogpeppe | jam: args in turn are: receiver, str ptr, str len (9), str ptr, str len (11), duration (60s) | 12:48 |
| jam | rogpeppe: there are still 2 more | 12:48 |
| rogpeppe | jam: i don't think the stack-printing logic knows how many args there are | 12:48 |
| rogpeppe | jam: given that args 2-6 look plausible, i think the first one is probably correct | 12:50 |
| jam | some of them have ... and some don't so it seems it might know something | 12:50 |
| jam | rogpeppe: anyway, i'm happy to agree that the receiver is probably not nil | 12:50 |
| rogpeppe | jam: it looks like another string at the end. | 12:53 |
| jam | rogpeppe: indeed, but not sure where that is coming from | 12:53 |
| jam | NewManager calls config.Validate() to make sure config.Secretary != nil | 12:53 |
| jam | I haven't found any code that changes the Secretary at runtime | 12:53 |
| jam | rogpeppe: we *have* seen a different nil pointer panic in one of witold's submissions, wpk, do you remember which? | 12:56 |
| wpk | Sec | 12:56 |
| jam | 10722 | 12:56 |
| rogpeppe | jam: BTW I'd suggest that you set GOTRACEBACK=all in your CI setup | 12:56 |
| jam | I added it to the bug | 12:56 |
| wpk | http://juju-ci.vapour.ws:8080/job/github-merge-juju/10722/artifact/artifacts/xenial.log this one | 12:56 |
| jam | rogpeppe: its the same failure | 12:56 |
| rogpeppe | jam: then you'd be able to tell which test was running | 12:56 |
| jam | rogpeppe: that one has 0x0 0x0 as the last two params | 12:57 |
| jam | feels a bit like 'print the stack that might happen to still have stuff on it' | 12:57 |
| rogpeppe | jam: yeah, i think it probably is | 12:57 |
| rogpeppe | jam: FWIW http://paste.ubuntu.com/24466503/ | 13:00 |
| rogpeppe | jam: same thing when it's called through an interface | 13:01 |
| rogpeppe | jam: i'd suggest setting GOTRACEBACK=all and waiting for it to happen again | 13:02 |
| rogpeppe | jam: this kind of thing will be better in go1.9 - we're getting column positions on error messages | 13:06 |
| rogpeppe | jam: i'm certain that Secretary is nil. look at this: http://paste.ubuntu.com/24466590/ | 13:11 |
| rogpeppe | jam: it faults on exactly the same address (0x30) | 13:12 |
| jam | rogpeppe: you're saying that would be the offset of the function we're calling? | 13:12 |
| rogpeppe | jam: i suspect something is using an uninitialised Manager somewhere | 13:12 |
| rogpeppe | jam: no, that's the address it's trying to get a value from | 13:12 |
| rogpeppe | jam: it's probably the offset into the interface value of the CheckLease method | 13:13 |
| rogpeppe | jam: or of the method table | 13:13 |
| rogpeppe | jam: ok, i know what's going on | 13:18 |
| rogpeppe | jam: and it's all my fault :) | 13:18 |
| rogpeppe | jam: i'm not quite sure what the best fix is though | 13:19 |
| rogpeppe | jam: actually, not too hard to fix. i'll raise a bug for it. | 13:22 |
| rogpeppe | wpk, jam: actually, is there an existing bug report for this? | 13:22 |
| jam | rogpeppe: https://launchpad.net/bugs/1686711 | 13:28 |
| mup | Bug #1686711: panic() during lease manager <panic> <worker> <juju:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1686711> | 13:28 |
| jam | rogpeppe: what is the bug? | 13:28 |
| jam | well, what is the underlying issue/ | 13:28 |
| jam | ? | 13:28 |
| rogpeppe | jam: ha! you sent that message at *exactly* the same time i clicked on Submit on https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1686720 | 13:28 |
| mup | Bug #1686720: worker/lease: NewDeadManager returns manager that crashes <juju:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1686720> | 13:28 |
| rogpeppe | jam: i'll leave it up to you to decide which one to go with :) | 13:29 |
| rogpeppe | jam: i need lunch | 13:29 |
| wpk | smacznego | 13:33 |
| jam | rogpeppe: I'll mark a duplicate | 13:34 |
| jam | rogpeppe: I went with yours | 13:35 |
| jam | since it explains what is actually wrong | 13:36 |
| === akhavr1 is now known as akhavr | ||
| Hetfield | hi guys, i need a fast help i could not find in the docs. basically is there something like juju resolved for "machines" instead of units? | 14:30 |
| Hetfield | i have juju with maas, it tried to deploy some apps on a machine, but, due to wrong tags, juju could not get a machine. now i fixed the tags and i would like to tell juju "try again" or juju add-machine and relocate units to the new machine | 14:31 |
| rick_h | Hetfield: so there's a retry-provisioning command that might help you there | 14:38 |
| rick_h | Hetfield: check out the command reference here: https://jujucharms.com/docs/2.1/commands (basically juju retry-privisioning --help) | 14:39 |
| Hetfield | rick_h: thx but it's not working | 14:39 |
| Hetfield | machine-status: current: provisioning error message: 'cannot run instances: cannot run instance: No available machine matches | 14:40 |
| Hetfield | rick_h: now i manually added a new machine. any way to tell juju to move all units to new machine? because they are 4 lxd so i need to manually add them, so boring | 14:52 |
| rick_h | Hetfield: no, unfortunately there's no migration path/tool there | 14:53 |
| Hetfield | ok i'm going to open a bug for this so | 14:53 |
| Hetfield | i just opened https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1686767 | 15:45 |
| mup | Bug #1686767: juju lacks manual unit relocation on new machines (retry-provisioning not working) <juju:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1686767> | 15:45 |
| Hetfield | hope you can give some love :) | 15:46 |
| rick_h | ty Hetfield | 15:58 |
| wpk | babbageclunk: ping? | 21:08 |
| babbageclunk | wpk: hey - still around? I was just wondering if you'd had an answer to your API versioning question | 21:29 |
| wpk | babbageclunk: Yes, around, and yes | 21:35 |
| wpk | babbageclunk: there was quite a discussion about it today, as e.g. application API presents 4 versions using the same struct | 21:35 |
| wpk | 4 API versions with the same API | 21:35 |
| babbageclunk | wpk: oh cool - I figured you probably would have given that it was yesterday | 21:35 |
| wpk | babbageclunk: timezones sucks... | 21:36 |
| babbageclunk | wpk: weird! | 21:36 |
| wpk | everyone should be on CET! | 21:36 |
| frankban | wallyworld: ping, could you please take a look at https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/7290 . it is a change to the gui handler code that you helped implementing | 22:00 |
| wallyworld | frankban: sure, otp but after that | 22:01 |
| frankban | wallyworld: thanks, and have a good day | 22:01 |
| wallyworld | you too | 22:04 |
| wallyworld | balloons: oracale call just finished. what's the tl;dr; on the release? | 22:05 |
| === frankban is now known as frankban|afk | ||
| === mup_ is now known as mup | ||
| balloons | wallyworld, seems we can ship 5177 | 22:14 |
| wallyworld | awesome | 22:14 |
| menn0 | wallyworld, anastasiamac, axw: now that we require Go 1.8 our install instructions in README.md and CONTRIBUTING.md might give people trouble (as per bug 1662857) | 22:16 |
| mup | Bug #1662857: cannot go get the source code <juju-core:Confirmed> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1662857> | 22:16 |
| menn0 | people are most likely to have Go 1.6 installed and when they do go get -d -v github.com/juju/juju/... it'll fail | 22:17 |
| menn0 | i'm thinking we should change the instructions to tell people how to get Go 1.8 first | 22:17 |
| menn0 | and then direct them to do go get -d -v github.com/juju/juju/... | 22:17 |
| menn0 | I also think the "install-dependencies" make target then shouldn't install Go for people | 22:18 |
| menn0 | thoughts? | 22:18 |
| anastasiamac | menn0: sounds great - feel free to update ;) | 22:26 |
| menn0 | anastasiamac: I will. just wanted some concensus | 22:26 |
| anastasiamac | menn0: since we r taking 5177 as per balloons ^^ for beta3, this will end up on beta4 | 22:26 |
| anastasiamac | menn0: well, u have my +1 - anythign to improve docs and user experieneces | 22:27 |
| menn0 | thumper: repeating in a summarised way for thumper. | 22:27 |
| menn0 | we now require Go 1.8 | 22:27 |
| anastasiamac | thumper: can we talk now-ish? | 22:27 |
| thumper | morning | 22:27 |
| thumper | yeah | 22:27 |
| menn0 | people are likely to have Go 1.6 installed | 22:27 |
| menn0 | this means our instructions of go get github.com/juju/juju/... in the README and CONTRIBUTING docs will fail for them | 22:28 |
| menn0 | thumper: I'd like to change the instructions to tell people how to get Go 1.8 first | 22:28 |
| menn0 | and then get them to pull the code | 22:28 |
| menn0 | also change "install-dependencies" target not to install Go | 22:29 |
| menn0 | thumper: sound ok? | 22:29 |
| menn0 | thumper, anastasiamac : oh man... some of the instructions in the README as Juju 1.x specific | 22:32 |
| menn0 | embarrassing | 22:32 |
| thumper | heh | 22:32 |
| anastasiamac | menn0: yeah :( i think noone looked at the full contents of these files in a while... I've lloked at one paragraph recently... but did not have a chance to have a comprehensive scan/update... | 22:50 |
| anastasiamac | menn0: thank you for doing it ;D | 22:50 |
| axw | menn0: (hours later) sounds fine to me | 23:25 |
| menn0 | axw: cheers | 23:26 |
| babbageclunk | wallyworld: take a look at the tiny PR here? https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/7291 | 23:26 |
| wallyworld | sure | 23:26 |
| babbageclunk | wallyworld: Once we're happy with that I'm tempted to try implementing the API code that will use the methods first. | 23:27 |
| babbageclunk | axw: oh, you're up! Could you look at ^ as well to check it matches your thinking? | 23:29 |
| axw | babbageclunk: okey dokey | 23:29 |
| babbageclunk | ta! | 23:29 |
| wallyworld | babbageclunk: you certainly could implement th api methods which use IsRouteable | 23:36 |
| babbageclunk | how can daylight savings changes feel so confusing for so long? | 23:36 |
| anastasiamac | thumper: oh, this one looks to be not-quiet-fixed :( https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1680392 | 23:57 |
| mup | Bug #1680392: Model migration fails on large model <juju:New for thumper> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1680392> | 23:57 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!