Awesome!!
Would be nice, some day to have a hackathon of Juju it self, where we can
learn how to contribute to the core.
Abs,
Sebas.
2014-09-18 15:08 GMT-03:00 Jorge O. Castro jo...@ubuntu.com:
Hi everyone, I've scheduled everything out into the holidays, taking
into account conferences,
Good to know! Thanks ;)
Cheers,
Sebas.
Em 06/09/2014 16:06, Kapil Thangavelu kapil.thangav...@canonical.com
escreveu:
Its possible (although unscheduled atm) a real provider could be done for
DO when the provider object storage requirements are dropped from juju
which is work that's
Thanks for all of this, all good and very helpful stuff :)
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical
cur...@canonical.com wrote:
juju-core 1.21-alpha1
A new development release of Juju, juju-core 1.21-alpha1, is now available.
Getting Juju
juju-core 1.21-alpha1 is
Is there a way to see what commits made it in to this release? I'm curious
to know if a few patches (that weren't tied to bugs until recently) made it
in.
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Samuel Cozannet
samuel.cozan...@canonical.com wrote:
Thanks for all of this, all good and very helpful
Greetings folks,
The Juju Ecosystem team at Canonical (joined remotely by community members)
recently had a developer sprint in beautiful Dillon, Colorado to Get Things
Done(™).
If you prefer a formatted version of this with pictures see here:
I tackled several items this week that were already reviewed and ready for
charmer interaction. The quality of the review queue interaction has
improved at least 110% over prior engagements. Big hat tip to everyone
involved in clearing out the queue last week, and making the review process
more
On 19 September 2014 01:32, David Cheney david.che...@canonical.com wrote:
There were three problem reviewboard was supposed to address, review
comments are sent immediately, no side by side diffs, and no way to to
chained proposals.
I think that over the last few months we've all learnt to
On 19 September 2014 01:32, David Cheney david.che...@canonical.com wrote:
There were three problem reviewboard was supposed to address, review
comments are sent immediately, no side by side diffs, and no way to to
chained proposals.
I think that over the last few months we've all learnt to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19.09.2014 03:32, David Cheney wrote:
There were three problem reviewboard was supposed to address,
review comments are sent immediately, no side by side diffs, and no
way to to chained proposals.
I think that over the last few months we've
Right now I'm a bit undecided, the usage of ReviewBoard is too fresh. But
Jesse made good points and in general Im always happy when we're using less
instead of using more tools. I can live with the number of mails, GMail
does grouping them fine. And I started to add my comments after a first
pass
Hey guys.
Long time lurker with the occasional suggestion.
I
have an idea for something that might be beneficial to the project as a
whole. Has it been considered about custom coding a review system that
will interface with github hooks and provide what is needed to all juju
dev's and keep
There's one thing that hasn't been mentioned - reviewboard gives us a
unified review queue. On github you need to look in 8 places to see all
the stuff up for review, and anything not in juju/juju tends to get lost.
This is really important since that can have a big effect on our velocity.
I
Im more than willing to help improve the work flow for you guys. As well as
fixup issues you giys feel rb has
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Original message
From: Nate Finch nate.fi...@canonical.com
Date: 19/09/2014 1:32 PM (GMT+01:00)
To: Jonathan Aquilina
Just a suggestion:
A git plugin similar to what Gerrit has would simplify things. For example,
Gerrit has a nice little plugin called Review. Simply doing:
git review
In your current branch would push the patchest to gerrit. Something similar for
RB, would probably simplify things a lot.
I don't yet have a strong opinion either way. I do think that since we
invested so much time in getting Review Board set up, we should use it for
a bit longer to see if these are growing pains.
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Gabriel Samfira
gsamf...@cloudbasesolutions.com wrote:
Just a
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Nate Finch wrote:
There's one thing that hasn't been mentioned - reviewboard gives us a
unified review queue.
Can I ask how kanban doesn't do this job for you? I've heard this said a
couple of times but I realized the way I find out what needs to be looked
at is to go to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19.09.2014 16:44, Richard Harding wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Nate Finch wrote:
There's one thing that hasn't been mentioned - reviewboard gives
us a unified review queue.
Can I ask how kanban doesn't do this job for you? I've heard this
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Dimiter Naydenov
dimiter.nayde...@canonical.com wrote:
+1, In addition you can always check
https://github.com/juju/juju/pulls to see what's in the queue. For
sub-repositories it's the same, like
https://github.com/juju/names/pulls. While I agree it's not all
We will all be seeing each other in 2 weeks we can discuss it then
On Friday, September 19, 2014, Eric Snow eric.s...@canonical.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Matthew Williams
matthew.willi...@canonical.com javascript:; wrote:
I do think it's too early to tell though. Why not
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Eric Snow eric.s...@canonical.com wrote:
I agree that reviewboard as we currently have it now adds extra work
to our workflow. Not only does this impact the juju team, but it does
add a stumbling block to more community involvement. However, my firm
belief is
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 6:11 AM, Gabriel Samfira
gsamf...@cloudbasesolutions.com wrote:
Just a suggestion:
A git plugin similar to what Gerrit has would simplify things. For example,
Gerrit has a nice little plugin called Review. Simply doing:
git review
In your current branch would push
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:32 PM, David Cheney
david.che...@canonical.com wrote:
There were three problem reviewboard was supposed to address, review
comments are sent immediately, no side by side diffs, and no way to to
chained proposals.
It will be worth being extra clear on ReviewBoard's
Given that I've in some part driven the switch to ReviewBoard, I want
to make sure we are all on the same page and any decision on its
future can be made objectively. This is an outgrowth of the current
discussion on whether or not we should ditch reviewboard.
Let's look at the pros and cons of
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Eric Snow eric.s...@canonical.com wrote:
Given that I've in some part driven the switch to ReviewBoard, I want
to make sure we are all on the same page and any decision on its
future can be made objectively. This is an outgrowth of the current
discussion on
I am more than willing to help out wity those modifications
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Original message
From: Eric Snow eric.s...@canonical.com
Date: 19/09/2014 5:41 PM (GMT+01:00)
To: juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
Subject: Re: The Pros and Cons of ReviewBoard.
On Fri, Sep
juju-core 1.20.8
A new proposed stable release of Juju, juju-core 1.20.8, is now available.
This release may replace stable 1.20.7 after a period of evaluation. If
no issues are raised about this version, it will released on or after
September 24, 2014.
Getting Juju
juju-core 1.20.8 is
At the risk of opening a can of worms:
Reviewboard doesn't have to be a barrier to contributing. We could allow
new contributors/ drive by fixes to use github.
Matty
On 19 Sep 2014 17:05, Eric Snow eric.s...@canonical.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Jonathan Aquilina
If we automate the creation of reviewboard reviews whenever a pull request
is made, it would make it trivial even for outsiders.
On Sep 19, 2014 5:01 PM, Matthew Williams matthew.willi...@canonical.com
wrote:
At the risk of opening a can of worms:
Reviewboard doesn't have to be a barrier to
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Eric Snow eric.s...@canonical.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:32 PM, David Cheney
david.che...@canonical.com wrote:
There were three problem reviewboard was supposed to address, review
comments are sent immediately, no side by side diffs, and no way to to
Thats what im suggesting be it coding somethign from scratch or
adapting RB to make it much easier to work with.
---
Regards,
Jonathan
Aquilina
Founder Eagle Eye T
On 2014-09-19 23:01, Matthew Williams
wrote:
At the risk of opening a can of worms:
Reviewboard
doesn't have to be a
I also suggested in another part of the thread sending an email when
a new request is submitted to all those invovled with the reviewing.
---
Regards,
Jonathan Aquilina
Founder Eagle Eye T
On 2014-09-19
23:14, Nate Finch wrote:
If we automate the creation of reviewboard
reviews whenever a
31 matches
Mail list logo
