[00:49] https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10834/files [01:31] kelvinliu: +1 but with a request for validation, might be possible, let me know [01:32] thumper: lgtm, ty [01:36] wallyworld: tyrv, no, we can't validate the cr before getting the CRD. because it's just a string for us without knowledge of the CRD. [01:37] kelvinliu: yes, but can't we make an api call to validate? [01:37] but k8s will return the validation error if the deployed CR did't match the CRD format [01:38] and we can't check that before actually trying to create one? [01:38] there's no k8s Validate() method? [01:38] i guess we can't be sure the crd exsists [01:38] until be process the entire yaml [01:38] so just deploy, either success or fail(return validation error from k8s) would be better, [01:39] what does kubectl do if the unstructured cr yaml is bad? [01:39] errors returns from api-server [01:39] does it return an error or just do it and you see the error with kubectl get [01:40] we are following the kubectl way [01:40] ok, so long as we set an error in juju status which i think we do [01:40] yes, we do [01:40] ok, sgtm, ty [01:44] np [01:52] hpidcock: getting through your PR, have a meeting in 5 but will continue after that [02:51] "Highlighting some important Juju workloads" https://discourse.jujucharms.com/t/2077 [02:52] hpidcock: why do we need to annotate the pods with init id as part of the running check? [02:56] ah, if you scale directly in k8s, the juju unit won't exist straight away [02:58] babbageclunk: nice work on the vsphere nics bug [02:59] :( [02:59] oops, thanks! [03:09] wallyworld: yeah there is a race condition that the unit and provider id has not matched yet, which means the WatchContainerStart facade will filter it out because it doesn't know it yet. [03:10] Also, it's now a nice useful debug annotation :) [03:11] indeed [03:22] anyone else getting test fails on localServerSuite.TestNetworkInterfacesForMultipleInstances? I think it's an ordering issue, but wondering if anyone has fixed it or seen it [04:56] hpidcock: i've not seen it it myself. is it blocing landing your PR? [04:58] I don't think it will block, something is using a map somewhere, it has 2 elements, so that makes it a 50% chance to land :D [04:58] could be worse :-) [04:59] kelvinliu: your PR good to land today too? [05:01] wallyworld: i think so, I m solving some races in tests. [05:01] ok, ty! [08:20] Still after a tick on https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10821. [08:58] nammn_de: Can you try the 2nd QA step on a different substrate for patch 10821 and approve if it passes? Need to get it landed. [09:01] manadart: will do :-) [09:02] does it have to be space aware like aws? Or does lxd work? [09:05] nammn_de: LXD should work. [09:12] manadart or nammn_de: one line PR for fixing the ec2 intermittent test failure that hpidcock reported: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10835 [09:15] manadart: have you considered whether we want to be passing space ids in the migration content? [09:15] manadart: that's the only thing keeping me from flagging that Approve, so if you're confident we can move forward [09:20] jam: I am confident. I understand communicating in terms of space names from a conceptual point, but I don't think reverting from IDs gets us any more "correctness" for the effort. [09:38] manadart: run qa, approved as you are confident and qa worked [09:38] nammn_de: Ta. [10:37] achilleasa: Looks like I need to rebase with your test fix for mine to play ball and land. [10:38] manadart: fix is still landing... that test fails about 20% of the time so if you retry the merge it should probably work [10:39] achilleasa: Giving it another lash. Last 2 failed. [10:44] stickupkid: coming back to the charming thing. I was thinking a little how to make it consistent with the old behaviour while removing the bug we were talking before. I think this should do it https://github.com/juju/charm/pull/297/files [11:05] nammn_de, nearly there :D [11:18] manadart: fix has landed [11:19] achilleasa: Yeah, mine was backed up behind yours, so I could have just waited. Running now. [11:50] stickupkid: updated it [11:51] nammn_de, much better [11:52] readability ftw! [11:53] stickupkid: let's hope big that now all things work as expected there compared with before :D [12:01] achilleasa: Mine is in. Let me see if I can chase this issue. I think your time is better spent on the instance-poller stuff. [12:13] manadart: what do you mean by “a zero-value SpaceInfo “ for the peergrouper getHASpaceFromConfig() [12:15] hml: "network.SpaceInfo{}" [12:15] hml: Which is effectively sending "" for space ID/name. [12:16] manadart: ack [12:47] hml: one small comment for your PR; I will run the QA steps in a bit [12:47] achilleasa: thank you. [12:48] achilleasa: if you have time after stand up, or after pick up, i’d like to chat on the other one pls 10825 [12:49] hml: sure, I have 1h before pickup so let's do this after standup [13:26] Hi all, I am deploy a kubernetes-core on a onpremise vpshere environment atm. its already 10 minutes 'stuck' at Juju Controller is initializing. Please wait. The console of the juju-controller VM is waiting at a logon screen. is this normal behavior? [13:40] manadart: ping? can you join daily for pr chat? [13:43] hml: OMW [13:56] manadart: do these changes make sense to you? I reuse the metrics pointer from application to use them in the charmconfigwatcher [13:56] https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10833 [14:19] jam: I was looking into how some charm tests are written in juju/juju. Some are under /juju/juju/repositoy... and they contain a "version" file as well. Right now the "git describe dirty" would take precedence over the version file. Is that wanted? [14:41] stickupkid: got a minute? [14:57] stickupkid: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10836 added some background [15:07] rick_h: above I sent to jam ^ should vcs or version file take priority? [15:25] hml achilleasa: Should I expect all bindings not-explicitly defined to be "0" now? [15:27] manadart: yes, the exception is if the application’s default endpoint has a defined value. [15:28] hml achilleasa: This looks like the issue with https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1850589 [15:28] Bug #1850589: migrating kubernetes-core fails [15:29] The bindings migrated from 2.6 are all "" in the 2.7 model. [15:31] manadart: i thought we had code to convert them when the bindings were migrated. hrm… [15:40] manadart: hml That looks correct to me; it's the old default space name, no? [15:41] achilleasa: yes… but we should be saving in to the db with an ID, not a name [15:45] achilleasa: manadart i think i found a bug in the cmr code related to the space name/id… spaceIDs do not translate outside of the given model. spaces are used to match up subnets on each side of the offer. [15:45] Ok it was defently a firewall issue. conjure-up is now deploying the kubernetes-core on the vsphere environment [15:48] achilleasa hml: Look at what I posted in the bug. The issue is here: https://github.com/juju/juju/blob/6bf5de9ded487a4ecb8d23a8118ef3df030c24c0/state/migration_import.go#L853 [15:49] We are relying on NewBindings to return endpoint:space-id, but if all are "", it returns the original map. [15:50] So we import it untouched from an old controller with no explicitly bound endpoints. [16:00] hml: this is why we should probably dumb down NewBindings so it only works with space ids... ^^ [16:02] achilleasa: ensuring it’s called that way might be a bigger problem. and changing code handingly “” [16:06] achilleasa hml: Who should I assign it to? I have to make a move here. [16:06] achilleasa: can you pick it up? i’m knee deep in get the other two PRs going [16:24] hml: on it [16:24] achilleasa: awesome! [16:38] hml: ok, so the issue here is that when you export from 2.6.x the description contains ep => space name (with "" for the default) whereas for 2.7+ it will contain space IDs... I guess the fix is to auto-map "" => AlphaSpaceID [16:39] achilleasa: yes, a good place to start. we should perhaps review with handing of model config default-space. [16:52] hml: since the model config is a 2.7 only feature, I think that the migration should not take it into account as it could lead to unpredictable bindings [16:53] achilleasa: gd point [17:20] Someone wanna take a look at this one? https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10838 Adds bash branch completion [17:22] nammn_de: sure thing [17:59] rick_h: should 'juju run --unit ubuntu-lite/0 "network-get another"' print something out? [18:01] achilleasa: no? since it's not in a relation context? [18:01] achilleasa: or maybe...thinking more [18:01] rick_h: ah yes... [18:01] * rick_h checks if that's an extra-binding or a endpoint [18:02] well, I have a fix for thumper's issue and probably https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1850589 [18:02] Bug #1850589: migrating kubernetes-core fails [18:03] achilleasa: hmm, what does 2.6 do with it? [18:26] rick_h: something odd is going on 'github.com/juju/juju/cmd/juju/commands/exec.go:434: timed out waiting for result from: unit ubuntu-lite/0' [18:27] achilleasa: yea... [18:27] achilleasa: working to rebootstrap/test that here as well [21:55] have a minute? any eyes on this piece is appreciated: https://discourse.jujucharms.com/t/draft-juju-2-7-0-creating-a-new-usability-standard-for-infrastructure-automation/2294 === narindergupta is now known as narinderguptamac [23:37] fwiw, we already collect and display in machine-format cloud 'source' [23:38] wallyworld: path of less resistence is to add it to tabular as 'Kind' [23:38] wallyworld: but 'personal' clouds r called 'local' atm.. m happy to keep them as 'local'.. r u?