[03:03] Docs review available for anyone with a rubber stamp https://github.com/juju/docs/pull/3507 [03:04] Actually, I'm just going to merge it in as it only brings the repo up-to-date with what's already there [04:03] thumper: do you have any thoughts on the use cases for LXD should be described? with LXD clustering, I feel like saying that it's only for local development is selling it short [04:13] yes local development only would be selling it short [04:14] one use case I had thought about was using LXD cluseter to install maas [04:14] using LXD clusters, you have a very lightweight cloudish thing [09:02] manadart_, achilleasa : CR https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11762 [09:10] stickupkid: I'm looking. [09:44] manadart_, quick HO? [10:03] manadart_, hopefully that'll fix everything in that PR [10:03] stickupkid: I already approved it. [10:13] manadart_: where was that code that you were showing me? My grep-fu only seems to match a call to Subnets() in client/subnets/cache.go with an UnknownId arg [10:14] achilleasa: environes/networking, environs/space ? [10:15] `ReloadSpaces` is in environs/space/spaces.go. That's where the fallback to subnet discovery is. [10:15] ah just found it :D [10:16] so the thing is that I can't seem to be able to get all CIDRs from the lxd api [10:47] hi all, [10:48] I would like to add some little things in `cloudinit-userdata` model config, but I have this error in return: The update path 'settings.' contains an empty field name, which is not allowed. [11:35] stickupkid: or manadart_ simple PR for a bug https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11763 [11:41] achilleasa: Will do it in a sec. [11:43] manadart_: not in a rush. If you have a few min later let's jump back into the HO to chat subnet discovery again bec I think I'm stuck [11:56] achilleasa: Swap you: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11764 === arif-ali_ is now known as arif-ali [14:52] hml, i'm unsure we would want a mutex in the firewaller that gates every openstack call [14:53] manadart_: clear to land 11764 [14:53] hml, esp. when ensureGroups could take forever depending on the api calls [14:54] can I get a CR on https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11765? [14:54] hml, we should be resilent against things not being there imo [14:55] stickupkid: rgr. in that case. is it appropriate for us to be removing security group rules like this? that aren’t in our list or egress rules? [14:55] let me check that next [14:55] hml, this worries me though https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11756/files#diff-cc8fa9cbee78e4f349622a6a1d6d9f24R570 [14:58] hahahaha [14:59] achilleasa: Ta. [15:35] status tests seem to be flaky [15:46] hml, I think what the code is doing is fine, we just need to handle the issue that we may end up deleting a sg that's already gone [15:46] https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11756 [15:52] stickupkid: k, i’ll review shortly [16:26] hml: can you also add https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11765 to the review queue? it's a really small patch [16:27] achilleasa: sure [16:27] petevg: you might also want to QA this before we land it ^^^ [16:31] achilleasa: roger that. [22:30] hit this just now https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1885339 [22:30] Bug #1885339: unit not removed from relation [22:31] I remove a unit, but it never leaves the relation [22:31] I'm thinking this can't be intended [22:31] is it?