| Chipaca | ｇｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｏｄ ｍｏｒｎｉｎｇ！ | 08:16 |
|---|---|---|
| jam | morning Chipaca | 08:35 |
| Chipaca | taking a page from pytest, would 'pip install ops-k8s' feel like a reasonable way to install the k8s ops component? | 09:45 |
| jam | Chipaca, ops-k8s or component-k8s both feel good to me | 09:51 |
| jam | ops-lib-k8s | 09:51 |
| jam | just to brainstorm some things | 09:51 |
| Chipaca | ops-lib-k8s sgtm :) | 09:56 |
| jam | Chipaca, yeah, I think I like it the most so far | 09:59 |
| jam | and it fits the 'opslib' ops.lib stuff | 09:59 |
| Chipaca | it's not ready yet but https://github.com/chipaca/ops-lib-k8s exists :) | 10:08 |
| jam | oooh, shiny | 10:21 |
| jam | Chipaca, do we want people to typically put everything into __init__ or just import it into there? | 10:35 |
| jam | It feels odd to have a package that only has an __init__.py | 10:35 |
| Chipaca | jam: tbh in this case it could just be a k8s.py :) | 10:35 |
| jam | Chipaca, indeed, but does our ops lib support that? | 10:35 |
| Chipaca | i'm torn on which one is better | 10:35 |
| jam | Also where is LIBNAME, etc | 10:35 |
| Chipaca | this doesn't have opslib support yet | 10:35 |
| jam | Chipaca, I like that you can grow into having multiple files | 10:36 |
| Chipaca | i'll get to that :) | 10:36 |
| Chipaca | me too | 10:36 |
| Chipaca | but python doesn't care really, k8s.py and k8s/__init__.py are used in the same way | 10:36 |
| Chipaca | anyway, right now i'm getting it to work on 3.5 | 10:37 |
| Chipaca | python 3.5 doesn't support TLS newer than 1.2 | 10:38 |
| jam | Chipaca, *sigh*. given Firefox now needs you to explicitly enable support for older TLS | 10:57 |
| jam | Chipaca, out of curiousity, why "k8s_test.py" and not "test_k8s.py" I know we use the latter in ops, but was trying to figure out if there is a standard | 10:58 |
| facubatista | ¡Muy buenos días a todos! | 10:58 |
| jam | morning facubatista | 10:59 |
| facubatista | hola jam | 11:00 |
| Chipaca | jam: just because i renamed it | 11:00 |
| Chipaca | i mean | 11:00 |
| Chipaca | i did not rename it | 11:00 |
| Chipaca | :) | 11:00 |
| Chipaca | jam: i suspect unittest wouldn't find the former, fwiw | 11:00 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, jam, When building replace current hooks that are links to the charm https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/85 | 11:30 |
| mup | PR charmcraft#85: When building replace current hooks that are links to the charm <Created by facundobatista> <https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/85> | 11:30 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, jam: The "list revisions from the Store" command - https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/86 | 11:38 |
| mup | PR charmcraft#86: The "list revisions from the Store" command <Created by facundobatista> <https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/86> | 11:38 |
| facubatista | AttributeError: type object 'datetime.datetime' has no attribute 'fromisoformat' | 12:28 |
| facubatista | py3.5 hates me | 12:28 |
| Chipaca | facubatista: with all its being | 12:52 |
| facubatista | I need to stop this crazy dance of pathlib2 being used in py35, which is 99% the same than pathlib | 12:56 |
| * facubatista will propose a branch | 12:56 | |
| Chipaca | facubatista: standup? | 13:31 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, jam, in my charmcraft#86 branch, we keep "finding the information" from the context, which so far looks nice... if you're in the project, it finds the "charm name" from there... if not, you can use '--charm-name' and its fine | 16:47 |
| mup | PR charmcraft#86: The "list revisions from the Store" command <Created by facundobatista> <https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/86> | 16:47 |
| Chipaca | mhmm | 16:48 |
| facubatista | as it's an "option", it would be "charmcraft revisions --name=myblog", not "charmcraft revisions myblog" | 16:48 |
| facubatista | so far, maybe so good | 16:48 |
| facubatista | however, in the "release" command it gets ugly | 16:48 |
| facubatista | we can still guess the charm name, however the channel and revision are mandatories | 16:49 |
| facubatista | "charmcraft release 5 stable" looks weird | 16:50 |
| facubatista | "charmcraft release 5 stable --name=myblog" looks ugly | 16:50 |
| Chipaca | facubatista: 1 sec | 16:50 |
| Chipaca | charmcraft release --channel=stable --release=5 --name=myblog | 16:50 |
| facubatista | "charmcraft release --name=myblog --revision=5 --channel=stable" looks like those are options, but not | 16:50 |
| Chipaca | with --channel defaulting to edge and --release defaulting to 'last' | 16:51 |
| Chipaca | wouldn't that work? | 16:51 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, I don't know "last" | 16:51 |
| Chipaca | you can | 16:51 |
| Chipaca | by asking | 16:51 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, unless I go and do an extra hit to the store | 16:51 |
| Chipaca | why wouldn't you? | 16:51 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, however, isn't this a little dangerous, like releasing stuff to somewhere without the user specifying where? | 16:51 |
| Chipaca | that's why i suggested 'edge' be the default for channel | 16:52 |
| Chipaca | and not 'stable' :) | 16:52 |
| facubatista | yeah, sure | 16:52 |
| Chipaca | facubatista: OTOH you could leave channel as an argument | 16:52 |
| Chipaca | and make just revision an option | 16:53 |
| Chipaca | but then | 16:53 |
| facubatista | "charmcraft release edge" makes much more sense | 16:53 |
| Chipaca | ok :) | 16:53 |
| facubatista | as "last" is the revision that you want to release in the 99% of the cases | 16:53 |
| Chipaca | i was about to argue how it was a bit weird, but i'd be just arguing against myself :-P | 16:53 |
| Chipaca | facubatista: also as an aside, tab completion for --revision= would be very nice :-) | 16:54 |
| Chipaca | and for --name | 16:54 |
| Chipaca | but we can talk about that tomorrow (or next week (or...)) | 16:55 |
| facubatista | oh, I forgot about that | 16:55 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, also, channel can be multiple without getting the extra weirdness when it's not alone | 16:56 |
| facubatista | I mean, "snapcraft myblog 4 edge" is ok, but "snapcraft myblog 4 edge beta 3.0/edge" is weird | 16:57 |
| facubatista | "charmcraft edge" is ok, "charmcraft edge beta 3.0/edge" is still ok | 16:57 |
| facubatista | sorry | 16:57 |
| facubatista | I mean, "snapcraft release myblog 4 edge" is ok, but "snapcraft release myblog 4 edge beta 3.0/edge" is weird | 16:58 |
| facubatista | "charmcraft relase edge" is ok, "charmcraft release edge beta 3.0/edge" is still ok | 16:58 |
| Chipaca | ok | 17:21 |
| Chipaca | facubatista: and --revision=4,5,6 also works | 17:21 |
| Chipaca | or --revision=4 --revision=5 | 17:21 |
| Chipaca | i prefer the comma-separated one but thats just me :-) | 17:21 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, does it make sense to release multiple revisions at the same time? | 17:22 |
| facubatista | I think it may be easy to confuse | 17:22 |
| Chipaca | facubatista: when doing multi-arch, yes | 17:22 |
| facubatista | charmcraft release --revision=3 edge --revision=7 beta | 17:22 |
| facubatista | Chipaca, I think its way more normal to release one revision to multiple channels, than releasing several revisions at the same time | 17:23 |
| Chipaca | facubatista: again, when doing multi-arch, you release all the revisions that correspond to one point-in-time build at the same time, usually | 17:25 |
| Chipaca | facubatista: but it's not important tbh | 17:26 |
| Chipaca | we can nail it down later :) | 17:26 |
| facubatista | ok | 17:28 |
| * facubatista eods and eows, will be back on Monday! | 20:38 | |
| Chipaca | facubatista: have a good one! | 20:53 |
| Chipaca | i'm off for today too | 20:53 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!