There is lazy and there is also "I just based in that other worker" which happens, I am the proud parent of statushistorypruner and a rewrite is underway too, sorry.
On Tuesday, September 8, 2015, Tim Penhey <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/09/15 11:22, Andrew Wilkins wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:14 AM Ian Booth <[email protected] > <javascript:;> > > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:;>>> wrote: > > > > Those workers below aren't the only ones. There's also minunits and > > peergrouper > > workers. > > > > No-one does these things on purpose. Just last week I caught and > > rejected a pull > > request to introduce a new worker depending on state directly. > > People make > > mistakes. Perhaps we should introduce a test which fails if state is > > imported > > into any worker code. We have similar tests already for other > > forbidden imports. > > > > > > +1. I was thinking the same thing, and eventually that test should be > > increased to other packages too. > > Let's be honest, developers are lazy. When under pressure to land > things, they go and look for the simplest way to get something done. > > The problem has been that we didn't shout loud enough early enough that > there were to be "NO MORE STATE WORKERS", and what's more, making it a > priority to change the existing ones to api workers. > > In case any one missed it, "NO MORE STATE WORKERS". Onyx will take the > dblogpruner and txnpruner as we added those, and Menno already mentioned > this. > > Bugs have been filed for the five workers using *state.State directly, > and have been added to the tech-debt kanban board. > > https://canonical.leankit.com/Boards/View/116651667#workflow-view > > Tim > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > [email protected] <javascript:;> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev >
-- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
