On 15 September 2014 21:39, Ian Booth ian.bo...@canonical.com wrote:
On 16/09/14 00:50, Eric Snow wrote:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Eric Snow eric.s...@canonical.com wrote:
Yeah, those steps are a lot, though keep in mind that effectively it's
only 2 steps more than before if you use the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 16.09.2014 10:44, roger peppe wrote:
As far as I can make out, as long as you want to propose your
branch with only a single commit added to the log, this makes it
easy to use a merge-based flow and amounts to the same thing in the
end.
I
So poking around and filing
https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1369909
I found lines about
Sep 16 07:48:14 ip-10-39-60-247 rsyslogd-2079: message repeated 498 times:
[too many tcp sessions - dropping incoming request [try
http://www.rsyslog.com/e/2079 ]]
That is 500 times rsyslog had to
Oh, and after all this has been running for a while, I did see:
-rw--- 1 syslog adm178M Sep 16 08:11 all-machines.log
-rw--- 1 syslog adm513M Sep 16 07:53 all-machines.log.1
-rw--- 1 syslog adm513M Sep 16 07:26 all-machines.log.2
So it is successfully rotating the log
If i am not mistaken if you have multiple commits in a branch git
has something built in called git squash. This obviously eliminates the
5 step process into one merge and one push.
---
Regards,
Jonathan
Aquilina
Founder Eagle Eye T
On 2014-09-16 09:44, roger peppe wrote:
On 15 September
On 16 September 2014 09:22, Jonathan Aquilina jaquil...@eagleeyet.net wrote:
If i am not mistaken if you have multiple commits in a branch git has
something built in called git squash. This obviously eliminates the 5 step
process into one merge and one push.
I don't see that command. Are you
I dont think you have to rebase though. I think you can squash
multiple commits together.
---
Regards,
Jonathan Aquilina
Founder
Eagle Eye T
On 2014-09-16 11:27, roger peppe wrote:
On 16 September
2014 09:22, Jonathan Aquilina jaquil...@eagleeyet.net wrote:
If
i am not mistaken if you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 16.09.2014 12:32, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
I dont think you have to rebase though. I think you can squash
multiple commits together.
You're probably thinking about git commit --amend -m msg, which
folds the current changeset into the one
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Nate Finch nate.fi...@canonical.com wrote:
I don't see how having different identical structs that are updated
simultaneously in any way prevents any problems with compatibility.
If we're updating those structs simultaneously, we're completely
missing the point.
That is it indeed :)
---
Regards,
Jonathan Aquilina
Founder Eagle
Eye T
On 2014-09-16 11:58, Dimiter Naydenov wrote:
-BEGIN PGP
SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 16.09.2014 12:32, Jonathan
Aquilina wrote:
I dont think you have to rebase though. I think
you can squash multiple
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 7:59 PM, William Reade
william.re...@canonical.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Nate Finch nate.fi...@canonical.com wrote:
I don't see how having different identical structs that are updated
simultaneously in any way prevents any problems with compatibility.
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 7:27 PM, roger peppe roger.pe...@canonical.com wrote:
On 16 September 2014 09:22, Jonathan Aquilina jaquil...@eagleeyet.net wrote:
If i am not mistaken if you have multiple commits in a branch git has
something built in called git squash. This obviously eliminates the 5
On 16 September 2014 13:45, David Cheney david.che...@canonical.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 7:27 PM, roger peppe roger.pe...@canonical.com
wrote:
On 16 September 2014 09:22, Jonathan Aquilina jaquil...@eagleeyet.net
wrote:
If i am not mistaken if you have multiple commits in a branch
On 16/09/14 19:19, roger peppe wrote:
On 16 September 2014 02:12, Tim Penhey tim.pen...@canonical.com wrote:
On 12/09/14 01:35, Nate Finch wrote:
Separation of logic is absolutely a good thing. Separation of data is
not nearly so useful.
What I see as the real benefit of this work is
I think this comes down to checking whether the target unit's
agent-version is one that supports invoking relation contexts, and
failing nicely if it isn't -- ie I don't *think* it's to do with the
version of cmd/juju, but the version of cmd/juju*d* in play. Helpful?
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 3:20
John,
Thank you taking the time to run the logging through these tests.
I found that there is also the $SystemLogRateLimitInterval setting. Setting
that to 0 will disable the default rate limiting in rsyslog.
http://www.rsyslog.com/changing-the-settings/
I would be curious to see what the
16 matches
Mail list logo
