[15:25] <amansi26> We have some modules specific to a particular platform, what should be procedure to contribute a new module in the cloud-init community ? Is there any restriction on doing so? I came across this document https://cloudinit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/topics/hacking.html . Wanted to confirm is there anything apart from that is needed to contribute?
[15:25] <amansi26> can anyone guide me on this?
[15:42] <smoser> amansi26: there is not really anything else.
[15:42] <smoser> you're welcome to ask questions here. many/all of developers are in this channel.
[15:42] <smoser> you could open a bug and describe what you're after, or just make a pull request.
[15:44] <amansi26> As in OpenStack a feature contribution happens via blueprint/spec, that first needs to be approved before the code can be approved. So just want to confirm is there anything cloud-init also needed?
[15:46] <amansi26> smoser:Does community have any restrictions accepting modules that are specific to a particular platform / architecture?
[15:50] <smoser> no blueprint like thing.  if its a more complex idea that you'd like discussion on, then mailing list is probably the best path forward.
[15:50] <smoser> Odd_Bloke, blackboxsw_ ^ ?
[15:50] <smoser> no restrictions on platform/arch... it just has to do the right thing
[15:55] <amansi26> smoser: Whats the mailing list to contact?
[16:18] <Odd_Bloke> amansi26: https://cloudinit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/topics/code_review.html#asking-for-help <-- cloud-init@lists.launchpad.net
[18:42] <Odd_Bloke> mruffell: I'm picking https://github.com/canonical/cloud-init/pull/514/ back up again, aiming to have it landed by the end of this week; if you have any further comments/responses, now is your chance. :)
[19:21] <Odd_Bloke> falcojr: Is your Oracle PR ready for re-review?
[19:22] <falcojr> Odd_Bloke yes, sorry...forgot to re-request
[19:26] <Odd_Bloke> No worries!
[19:50] <Odd_Bloke> falcojr: The tests are failing, I've commented (https://github.com/canonical/cloud-init/pull/528/files#r469501088) on the part of the code that's causing it (spoiler alert: it's because xenial is old).  (I think the changes will be isolated there, though, so I'm not blocked on continuing my review.)
[19:55] <falcojr> gah, httpretty strikes again!
[19:55] <falcojr> thanks
[19:59] <falcojr> actually, Odd_Bloke that's an old build
[19:59] <falcojr> I fixed that one already
[19:59] <falcojr> the new failure is on bionic and something about packaging???
[20:00] <falcojr> I restarted the job because I didn't see an obvious reason, but still investigating
[20:07] <falcojr> gah, nevermind...the ordering of things in travis confused me
[20:07] <falcojr> ignore me :D
[20:20] <Odd_Bloke> ^_^
[21:45] <mruffell> roger that Odd_Bloke, I am happy to help with testing
[22:01] <Odd_Bloke> mruffell: OK, that's a good response.  (No further comments/responses allowed. ;)
[22:02] <Odd_Bloke> falcojr: I've re-reviewed #528.
[22:08] <falcojr> cool, I should get to it tomorrow morning