Re: juju test doesn't work

2017-05-31 Thread Tilman Baumann 
On 31.05.2017 14:39, Tim Van Steenburgh wrote:
> But, I couldn't. The review form at https://review.jujucharms.com/ will
> respond with a empty response (Firefox says https protocol error. Chrome
> says empty response.)
> Where would I report that as a bug?
> 
> 
> There's a "report bug" link at the bottom of the review queue web pages.
> I went ahead and filed a bug for the problem you're
> hitting: https://github.com/juju-solutions/review-queue/issues/86

Cool thanks. I see you already found out what the issue is. Great.

Cheers
 Tilman

-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: juju test doesn't work

2017-05-31 Thread Tim Van Steenburgh 
>
> But, I couldn't. The review form at https://review.jujucharms.com/ will
> respond with a empty response (Firefox says https protocol error. Chrome
> says empty response.)
> Where would I report that as a bug?
>
>
There's a "report bug" link at the bottom of the review queue web pages. I
went ahead and filed a bug for the problem you're hitting:
https://github.com/juju-solutions/review-queue/issues/86
-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: juju test doesn't work

2017-05-31 Thread Tilman Baumann 
On 31.05.2017 10:45, John Meinel wrote:
> I'm pretty sure 'charm' tools have moved over to using 'snap install
> charm' as the preferred method for getting the charm tools. I'm not sure
> that there is a way to deprecate/remove the versions that are in the
> archives. For something like Zesty, it probably would have been possible
> to just remove it, I think it was just an oversight.

Yea, I found references for that. But we can't just abandon the dpkg
package without letting the users know. :)
Replace the binary with 'echo use snap you fool' would be fine with me.

However, I should have mentioned. I did see that and tried that.

The charm command provided by the snap does not have a 'build' option.

$ charm build
ERROR unrecognized command: charm build


> I'm not sure about 'juju test' itself. It is actually a plugin supplied
> by the charm tools (I believe) rather than something that is part of the
> core 'juju' packaging. (The binary is actually /usr/bin/juju-test, and a
> while back people asked that anything we find in $PATH as 'juju-foo' can
> be called as just 'juju foo')

Yes, you are right. That did come from the charm-tools package. And it
is also not there with the charm snap.

> I *do* believe that there was a push to actually split "tools for Charm
> developers" away from "tools for people operating software with Juju".
> So likely there is something like "charm test" that you should actually
> be using, rather than an old, deprecated 'juju-test' that we shouldn't
> be installing anymore.


test as a charm command makes a lot of sense. And IIRC it already
exists, I think I used juju test mostly because of lingering docu
references to it.
But again, only the packeted version does that. The snap charm command
has no test command.


> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Tilman Baumann
> > wrote:
> [...]
> 
> During this development I found a number of bugs that made it quite hard
> to be productive.

-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: juju test doesn't work

2017-05-31 Thread John Meinel 
I'm pretty sure 'charm' tools have moved over to using 'snap install charm'
as the preferred method for getting the charm tools. I'm not sure that
there is a way to deprecate/remove the versions that are in the archives.
For something like Zesty, it probably would have been possible to just
remove it, I think it was just an oversight.

I'm not sure about 'juju test' itself. It is actually a plugin supplied by
the charm tools (I believe) rather than something that is part of the core
'juju' packaging. (The binary is actually /usr/bin/juju-test, and a while
back people asked that anything we find in $PATH as 'juju-foo' can be
called as just 'juju foo')

It does seem like the 'juju-test' plugin has not been kept up-to-date for
juju-2.X charm development. Or maybe it has but you need to 'snap install
charm' rather than using a debian package. (offhand I doubt it, because a
snap install charm would not give you a juju-test in your path).

I *do* believe that there was a push to actually split "tools for Charm
developers" away from "tools for people operating software with Juju". So
likely there is something like "charm test" that you should actually be
using, rather than an old, deprecated 'juju-test' that we shouldn't be
installing anymore.

John
=:->



On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Tilman Baumann <
tilman.baum...@canonical.com> wrote:

> I prepared two min charms which I needed for a customer.
> cs:~tilmanbaumann/logstash-conf-d-1
> https://github.com/tbaumann/charm-logstash-conf-d
> cs:~tilmanbaumann/logstash-input-elasticsearch-1
> https://github.com/tbaumann/charm-logstash-input-elasticsearch
>
> Those are subordninate charms that can be used like plugins to load
> custom configurations in logstash (/etc/logstash/conf.d/)
> Or to connect logstash to elasticsearch via relations.
>
> During this development I found a number of bugs that made it quite hard
> to be productive.
> Charm tools is broken. Thank god there is a custom ppa for it.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/charm-tools/+bug/1660004
>
> And juju test doesn't work. That is why my charms don't have tests yet.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1608723
>
> I felt quite confident about my manual tests and I see no reason to
> believe #1608723 will be gone soon, so I decided to submit my charms for
> review anyway.
> Probably wasting your time. But I was eager to see some feedback.
>
> But, I couldn't. The review form at https://review.jujucharms.com/ will
> respond with a empty response (Firefox says https protocol error. Chrome
> says empty response.)
> Where would I report that as a bug?
>
> So you see, right now quite a lot is broken for charm developers. At
> least those running Zesty.
>
>
> Please excuse my mini rant about infrastructure. I suppose this will get
> better again.
> But perhaps someone can offer some opinions about my charms? :D
>
>
> Cheers
>  Tilman Baumann
>
>
> PS: https://github.com/tbaumann/charm-logstash-conf-d has a tests branch
> with a initial testing idea. But I could never test it...
> The layer code is slightly more current than the published charms. I
> found a few typos I think.
>
> --
> Juju mailing list
> Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/
> mailman/listinfo/juju
>
-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

juju test doesn't work

2017-05-31 Thread Tilman Baumann 
I prepared two min charms which I needed for a customer.
cs:~tilmanbaumann/logstash-conf-d-1
https://github.com/tbaumann/charm-logstash-conf-d
cs:~tilmanbaumann/logstash-input-elasticsearch-1
https://github.com/tbaumann/charm-logstash-input-elasticsearch

Those are subordninate charms that can be used like plugins to load
custom configurations in logstash (/etc/logstash/conf.d/)
Or to connect logstash to elasticsearch via relations.

During this development I found a number of bugs that made it quite hard
to be productive.
Charm tools is broken. Thank god there is a custom ppa for it.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/charm-tools/+bug/1660004

And juju test doesn't work. That is why my charms don't have tests yet.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1608723

I felt quite confident about my manual tests and I see no reason to
believe #1608723 will be gone soon, so I decided to submit my charms for
review anyway.
Probably wasting your time. But I was eager to see some feedback.

But, I couldn't. The review form at https://review.jujucharms.com/ will
respond with a empty response (Firefox says https protocol error. Chrome
says empty response.)
Where would I report that as a bug?

So you see, right now quite a lot is broken for charm developers. At
least those running Zesty.


Please excuse my mini rant about infrastructure. I suppose this will get
better again.
But perhaps someone can offer some opinions about my charms? :D


Cheers
 Tilman Baumann


PS: https://github.com/tbaumann/charm-logstash-conf-d has a tests branch
with a initial testing idea. But I could never test it...
The layer code is slightly more current than the published charms. I
found a few typos I think.

-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju