An interesting scenario

2014-01-21 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
I have an interesting scenario which either is already catered for or should be catered for. I am currently using a local provider for testing and contribution purposes. I bootstrapped an environment and deployed the juju-gui i then shut down the computer and powered it on again this morning th

Re: github code reviews

2014-03-10 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
I have two suggestions that might help, but first let me tell you a bit about myself. I am project manager for LMMS (Linux Multimedia Studio) and we recently started using github for our version control hosting. With this we started using continuous integration provided free of charge by Travis C

Re: Juju-core on github

2014-03-14 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
For code review there is gerrit https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/ I have seen this used by the libreoffice project, and its very successful as there can be multiple people reviewing patches which get submitted. it integrates with any git version control and already github has a hook available to

Re: Juju-core on github

2014-03-14 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
d then towards a 2.0 release candidate in the next few weeks. > We > are likely to do the github switch right after that, so my estimation > would > be that the switch will be done mid-april. > > --Mark Ramm > > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Jonathan Aquilina > wrote:

Re: Juju-core on github

2014-03-15 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
works more how we would expect. (It requires > more set up and hosting the stuff ourselves, but it works closer to how > we > would expect.) > Gerrit might also be an option, but I'm hoping we can do pieces at a > time. > > John > =:-> > On Mar 14, 2014 10:33 PM, &quo

Re: Reviewing in progress work on Github

2014-06-04 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
Not trying to hijack this thread, but a suggestion for reviewing and CI testing. I have a hunch you guys already have something in place, but there is TRAVIS CI which integrates nicely with github repos through a yaml file. When a pull request is submitted it performs a build and then on the pull

Re: Reviewing in progress work on Github

2014-06-05 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
When you create the pull request you can give a description as to what the pull request is about hence you can mention Work In Progress. The only people that would get bombarded with these emails would be those that have developer access in the sense of being able to commit the pull requests > Can

Re: Reviewing in progress work on Github

2014-06-05 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
In regards to this feature. Why not write a hook for github to have it interface with LP > One of the many things I miss now that we have moved to Github/git is the > ability to put up a merge proposal with in-progress work, allowing > collaboration > on the implementation as it evolves etc. Launc

Re: not rebasing after PR?

2014-06-05 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
Nate you said rebase into a single commit. Git has the command squash to get all commits squashed into one. No need to rebase Sent from Samsung Mobile Original message From: Nate Finch Date: 05/06/2014 17:22 (GMT+01:00) To: juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Subject: not rebasing

Re: End Of Review marker

2014-06-12 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
I don't know if it will help with cose review you can comment and provide feed back of comments on the pull request Sent from Samsung Mobile Original message From: Matthew Williams Date: 12/06/2014 15:23 (GMT+01:00) To: Richard Harding Cc: juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Sub

Re: Proposal: making apt-get upgrade optional

2014-07-01 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
Why not use the auto update feature that is in Ubuntu.  I use it and recoeve emails about the upgrades Sent from Samsung Mobile Original message From: Antonio Rosales Date: 01/07/2014 21:38 (GMT+01:00) To: Andrew Wilkins Cc: juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Subject: Re: Propo

Re: Label: Ready For Review

2014-08-11 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
nks: -- [1] mailto:nate.fi...@canonical.com [2] mailto:david.che...@canonical.com [3] mailto:nate.fi...@canonical.com [4] http://github.com/juju/juju [5] http://github.com/juju/utils [6] http://github.com/juju/juju [7] mailto:Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com [8] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev [9] mailto:david.che...@canonical.com I know it is possible on the issue tracker to label things even pull requests. Not sure if that would be a good way too go or not? -- Regards, Jonathan Aquilina Founder Eagle Eye T -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev

Re: Unit Tests & Integration Tests

2014-09-11 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
that would fit into the workflow for you guys. --- Regards, Jonathan Aquilina Founder Eagle Eye T On 2014-09-11 17:29, Matthew Williams wrote: > Hi Folks, > > There seems to be a general push in the direction of having more mocking in unit tests. Obviously this is generally a good

Re: ReviewBoard is now the official review tool for juju

2014-09-16 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
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 Septem

Re: ReviewBoard is now the official review tool for juju

2014-09-16 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
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 wrote: > >> If i am not mistaken if you h

Re: ReviewBoard is now the official review tool for juju

2014-09-16 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
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

Re: Is ReviewBoard a good thing?

2014-09-19 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
keep things rather mainstream as well so as not to increase the entry level requirements fore new contributors? --- Regards, Jonathan Aquilina Founder Eagle Eye T On 2014-09-19 10:14, Frank Mueller wrote: > Right now I'm a bit undecided, the usage of ReviewBoard is too fresh. But Je

Re: Is ReviewBoard a good thing?

2014-09-19 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
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 Date: 19/09/2014 1:32 PM (GMT+01:00) To: Jonathan Aquilina Cc: juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Subject

Re: The Pros and Cons of ReviewBoard.

2014-09-19 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
I am more than willing to help out wity those modifications Sent from Samsung Mobile Original message From: Eric Snow 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 19, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Eric

Re: The Pros and Cons of ReviewBoard.

2014-09-19 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
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'

Re: The Pros and Cons of ReviewBoard.

2014-09-19 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
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 whene

Re: Juju 1.26-alpha3 moving to 2.0-alpha1

2015-12-05 Thread Jonathan Aquilina
Good Morning Alexis, Just out of curiosity have you guys considered offering nightly builds via PPA. I think nightly builds would be good to get testing of new features as well as existing functionality to ensure no regressions could have potentially been introduced. --- Regards, Jonathan