[00:35] rick_h_: So if we don't yet have the hardward info we should say something like "Hardware info unavailable"? [00:38] huwshimi: yes, that's a card I think [00:38] huwshimi: I think "Hardware details not available" if that'll fit [00:38] rick_h_: OK, I'll do that as part of the token styling branch. [00:39] huwshimi: thanks [01:55] kadams54: did you put up your branch? [02:38] ok, night all see you tomorrow [02:50] Night [05:01] huwshimi: Just landed https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/pull/305 after working through some merge issues. Turns out we had quite a bit of overlap in the code we were working on. [05:01] Er [05:01] It's not landed [05:01] Ready for QA :-) [05:02] kadams54: Ah, I'll take a look [05:04] Bah, stupid lint [05:05] :) [10:29] morning party people [10:32] rick_h_: Good morning :) [10:32] huwshimi: still around? morning man [10:32] rick_h_: Just been out and got home [10:32] huwshimi: very cool, thanks for the work last night. Will start going over the branches and qa'ing soon [10:32] after the coffee brews [10:33] :) [10:50] rick_h_: I saw you closed that branch. My only concern is that we will be showing something that doesn't exist, and may not ever exist (the search for example looks to have moved in more recent wireframes). No harm in leaving it there I guess though. [10:51] huwshimi: right, it'll only be for Mark S's demo portion. We won't release it as is for now. It's behind the feature flags as well [10:52] rick_h_: Yep, np [10:52] huwshimi: I think it's safe to leave for now and we'll work on that as we finish MV and release it from the feature flag [10:52] sure [10:55] rick_h_, huwshimi: morning, I need two reviews for https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/pull/309 [10:55] frankban: sure thing [10:55] rick_h_: thanks, this is a required change before placeUnit [10:55] I'll do a QA and then I need to sleep :) [10:56] huwshimi: heh, thanks [10:56] huwshimi: thanks and get some rest [10:56] It's not late, I'm just jet-lagged still :) [10:58] frankban: the hideChangeDescription is done in the bar itself next to the counter. Originally the branch worked: [10:58] "Drop a service, the bar would show "1 Added service XX Deploy" [10:58] and then after 2s it would hide the "Added service XX" part [11:02] rick_h_: uhm, it does not work in trunk [11:02] yea, something has been broken along the wya [11:03] the count isn't there [11:03] ant's branch added this work and I qa'd it originally [11:03] rick_h_: and the change description hides [11:03] I wonder if someone's rebase/merge conflict caused issues and it got lost [11:03] :-/ [11:04] rick_h_: I'm not sure if you saw my email about the summary "No uncommited changes" state being related to something there [11:04] https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/pull/288 [11:04] huwshimi: it is [11:04] huwshimi: well it's all related [11:04] rick_h_: I think the timeout is applying to the wrong element [11:05] huwshimi: right, and it looks like we're missing some code/elements [11:05] yeah [11:05] huwshimi: from that pull request ^ [11:05] so will have to diff and pull that back together [11:06] rick_h_: I saw it working at some stage though [11:07] huwshimi: yea, same here [11:07] frankban: :+1: on your branch [11:08] rick_h_, huwshimi: thank you! [11:10] rick_h_: so the current plan is: now we call add_unit when a service is deployed: we should prevent the ECS to really add that unit if it's not placed. When we drag the unit we call env.placeUnit(ghostUnit, toMachine), and at that point in some way the add_unit ECS call is activated, with the hooks to add the unit to the right machine. Correct? [11:11] frankban: I thought add_unit had to add that unit so that we could search for unplaced units using the filterByMachine(null)? [11:11] frankban: I see though, you mean to not actually add it to the ecs at that point though [11:12] but it's in the db [11:13] frankban: so in my head it was added to the ecs and db on add_unit, but with no machine assigned. When placed, it would update the model to have the right machine info and make sure the ecs for it was updated. [11:13] rick_h_: we can add the unit to the ECS and then placeUnit modifies the record [11:13] frankban: but your way sounds ok as well [11:18] rick_h_: both work well for the demo, the issue is the following: with my branch, we call add_unit after deploy, and that reflects our intent. Then we have an unplaced unit. The user switches to machine view, and she can 1) place that unit or 2) leave that unit in the unplaced column. Then she hits deploy. If she placed the unit, the intention is clear: she wants the unit on that machine. If the unit is still unpla [11:18] ced, then I guess the intention is to avoid adding the unit i.e. "I want to just keep this unit, commit my current changes, and then I will place this unit later". The current behavior is instead: this unit is unplaced, but is registered to be deployed, I'll create a new machine to host the unplaced unit. [11:18] frankban: yes, that's why I'm ok with that. It's a running question we need to go through with design on how to handle unplaced information at deploy time [11:19] frankban: luca has provided feedback that they want to 'try it out and see' in order to help define how that interaction works [11:19] frankban: it could just be ignored, as you suggest, or an error in the summary directing you to go back and place. [11:19] rick_h_: sounds good, new machines for unplaced units is a simpler story for us [11:19] frankban: in which case we'll also need some way to 'destroy' an unplaced unit [11:20] rick_h_: so yeah, place unit should just change the unit record in ECS [11:20] frankban: but I definitely understand your concerns. hatch and I have mentioned them to luca/design. [11:20] frankban: ok cool. Thanks [11:21] jcsackett: around this morning? [11:25] poor poor CI is getting a workout this week [11:26] ok, think I've reviewed and caught up with things atm. Going to go about that coffee and breakfast now [11:29] * frankban lunches [11:32] rick_h_: I figured out what was going on with the deployer bar, just pushing a branch [11:33] huwshimi: ok cool, if you've got it working then put your head on the card I assigned JC please and I'll take a look in a few and work to get that landed as well [11:34] rick_h_: Np, just running tests. [11:43] rick_h_: It's ready for review/qa. I'm heading to bed :) [11:46] Night all [11:53] huwshimi: night! [12:20] frankban: looks like conflicts hitting between you and huw there. Sorry about that. [12:21] bac: morning [12:21] hi rick_h_ [12:23] frankban: looks like a small one in the handlebars template [12:23] -

These changes will be deployed to: {{ machineName }}

[12:23] +

The following changes will be deployed

[12:38] rick_h_: looking [12:42] rick_h_: shipit again? [12:43] frankban: just delete the comment "merge request accepted" and it'll repick it up [12:44] rick_h_: ok thanks, maybe we should add instructions to the Build failed message [12:45] rick_h_: landing again [12:46] frankban: definitely. I honestly thought we did have some notes in there. [12:47] frankban: heh yep missing that step around everything else in https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/blob/develop/docs/continuous-integration.rst will add it [13:10] morning all. [13:10] morning [13:11] hi jcastro [13:11] hi jcsackett [13:11] i'm used to getting pinged when people wanted castro; haven't seen him get pinged when people meant to ping me that often. :p [13:11] all nicks in a channel should be unique to the first two characters [13:12] Morning all. [13:12] morning, kadams54. [13:13] I've got a YUI question. I see Y.Event.EventTracker being used all over in our code, but I can't find docs for it. I don't even find it in the yui3 codebase. [13:13] kadams54: one sec. [13:14] kadams54: app/assets/javascripts/event-tracker.js [13:15] rick_h_: i've tested local charm ingestion with the git ghost charm. it works as expected. i'm going to write a doc to go along with it for the handoff. [13:21] rick_h_, local charms in bundles with drag and drop onto the gui.. workable? [13:21] rick_h_, basically going to pre-load the local charms into the environment.. that should work? [13:21] hazmat`: I thought that didn't work because of the revision stuff [13:23] rick_h_, tbd.. its deterministic if you have an env reset.. its always revision file in the charm +1.. i was hoping to get away with no revision.. but that's probabably hosed.. i had a branch for p8 demo where i had deployer probe for the high rev on the local charm known to th eenv [13:24] hazmat`, if there's a livestream from the demo can you ask someone onsite to send the link to us so we can watch it? [13:26] jcastro, i'm busy in the demo room, missing keynotes.. should be linked from main ostack site [13:26] jcastro, http://www.openstack.org/home/Video/ [13:28] hazmat`: sorry, phone call [13:28] rick_h_, no worries [13:29] hazmat`: honest answer is I'm not sure off the top of my head. [13:29] hazmat`: it's something we thought would work but ran into issues due to revisions. I don't recall if juju-core would/wouldn't deploy a local charm without a rev [13:29] hazmat`: there's something there. we tried it and ended up failing due to an assumption somewhere in the pipeline [13:30] bac: can you make sure to send that doc/notes to hazmat` and james page please? They can make sure everyone is aware/has access to it if needed for demos [13:30] rick_h_: ack [13:32] kadams54: morning, I think huw and frankban have found the deployer bar issues you were looking into on your card? [13:34] y'all did a ton of work over the weekend. [13:34] yes, almost there [13:37] rick_h_: interesting. Did they commit a fix or just find where the bug was at? [13:37] rick_h_: that unit deploy error without MV flag seems approachable this morning. shall i grab it or is there something else i should go after? [13:38] kadams54: I think the fix is in, swimming atm with working on huw's update to fix the deployer bar notifications [13:38] jcsackett: I think that's fine now [13:38] jcsackett: frankban's branch that just landed I think fixes that [13:38] rick_h_: dig. [13:38] jcsackett: a verify/qa would be cool [13:38] rick_h_: verifying now. [13:39] rick_h_: OK, cool. I like cards that get fixed in other people's branches while I sleep. [13:39] kadams54: yea, give it a go and see if you can break it again [13:39] kadams54: I know huw sent an email out on it and I think one of these had a fix in it, been 4 or 5 branches since I got up so getting a bit lost [13:40] rick_h_: it appears to work on sandbox--was this observable there, or does it need a real env? [13:40] jcsackett: yea, it was there [13:40] rick_h_: also, how was camping? [13:40] cool, i'm marking it with frank and throwing it into daily call. [13:40] the campground was awful, the boy had fun, the wife and my verizaon bill didn't appreciate all the branches :) [13:41] * jcsackett laughs [13:41] but it was nice to get out of the house and sleep under the sky a bit [13:41] well, at least your son enjoyed it. [13:41] :) [13:41] he loves camping, and they had lots of stuff for kids [13:41] that's cool. [13:50] morning hatch [13:51] morning [13:51] how goes it? [13:51] hatch: crazy wheeeee [13:54] what time is the demo: [13:54] ? [13:54] redir: tues AM [13:54] Makyo: ping [13:54] frankban, hi [13:55] ahh so one more day to polish it [13:55] redir: yea, well make it work today [13:55] and collapse :) [13:55] rick_h_: time for a quick chat? [13:55] bac: definitely [13:55] kadams54: looking at qa'ing your branch. It's all up to date per huw's feedback? [13:55] rick_h_: in standup [13:56] rick_h_: Yes, should be. Event bindings are now destroyed properly. [13:56] kadams54: coolio will look after this call thanks [13:56] Makyo: I noticed that the parentId when creating machines in ECS refers to the change key. for placeUnit, the caller must be able to retrieve the machine id. Also, AFAIK the same machine id should be used when creating the ghost machine in the db [13:58] well this is interesting, I had almost exactly what frankban had in his place-unit branch, I just had one property switched around....lol damn [13:59] frankban, yes, I believe so. ecs._translateKeysToIds will do that for any ECS record that has a keyToId method. It's my understanding that the ID will have to be the key for the ghost machine, so long as validation allows that. We do have other examples of changing that such as https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/blob/develop/app/views/ghost-deployer-extension.js#L164 [14:00] Makyo: so IIUC we do something like machineId = env.addMachine(..) and then app.db.machines.add({id: machineId}) but at that point the machine token should end up with a very ugly name [14:01] frankban, hmm, correct... Unless we just use something like '(pending machine)' if the machine hasn't yet been created. [14:01] Makyo: the alternative is to use a modelId in the options, so we create a new machine in the db with a customized name (e.g. new1), then call addMachines passing that id to the options [14:01] Makyo: and then making the parent check using options.modelId [14:01] frankban, That makes sense, yeah [14:02] Makyo: cool, I'll take a look [14:02] hatch: what code are you referring to? [14:03] the env.add_unit call and callback stuff in ghost deployer extension.js I was using the service name not the ghost service id so I couldn't get it to work properly [14:03] in hindsight ghostserviceid makes sense :) [14:09] hatch: IC :-) unfortunate overlapping (but I guess it's unsurprising given the demo panic) [14:24] hatch: are you in a good place to rebase and be able to look at the drag/drop? Or still need the placeUnit first? [14:25] rick_h_ I think now with frankban's latest branch it should be good to go, I'm just running through kadams54 PR [14:25] then I can get on it [14:25] hatch: rgr [14:30] ohh you already shipped it [14:30] lol [14:31] hatch: heh, I added a card in the backlog to follow up on your comments [14:32] I went with huw's review and qa plus I did a qa to make sure it merged cleanly still and did shipit, but your feedback is valid and will be followed up on [14:34] comingsoon is broken [14:35] http://comingsoon.jujucharms.com/:flags:/il/mv/ [14:35] changeset count is in the header [14:35] bah [14:35] lol [14:35] frankban: the demo needs to use quickstart. where is the best place to get it? trusty repo or some PPA? [14:36] bac: the ppa, I don't know that trusty has been updated for the bug fixes yet [14:36] bac: juju/stable ppa [14:36] ty [14:37] bac: what do they use quickstart for? [14:37] frankban: deploy charmworld [14:37] hatch: can you try a local copy? I wonder if this is coming soon css issues [14:37] no it's in develop [14:37] rick_h_, it's in trunk. [14:37] hatch: I don't see what in the CSS is making that happen [14:38] ok thanks :) [14:38] it's not css, it's markup [14:38] the changes button needs preventDefault on it as well [14:38] because it's an A it breaks the url [14:38] gotcha [14:38] I'm just going to sit back and pretend I've never said anything about using anchors [14:38] ... [14:38] lol! [14:39] well it's incomplete features anyway. So not fair [14:39] there is actually a full deployer bar up there [14:39] it's really broken now [14:39] a bisect is probably necessary here [14:39] yea, looking. It's been a mess. It worked, then got broken, then huw fixed it, and I in qa tweaked it, and not it's very broken [14:40] so bisect won't help a ton as you'll find it's been broken for a while in a bunch of branches. [14:40] oh darn! [14:40] https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/pull/288 is the original working branch [14:41] ohh that's a lot of changed files heh [14:41] icons mostly [14:41] ok I'm going to get my branch landed first [14:42] oh yay my keyboard backlight just stopped working [14:42] F^&*^&* Apple [14:43] rick_h_: can you chat for a moment? [14:43] jcsackett: sure thing [14:43] rick_h_: https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/g3hgvsy4smtzi2x6dptuesyplya?authuser=2&hl=en [14:45] jcsackett: https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/pull/307 [14:47] hatch: jcsackett is going to look at that [14:48] ...the horror, the horror. :p [14:48] hatch: some cross between ant/huw/me made something wonky [14:48] jujugui I'm on the deployer bar thing. [14:48] rick_h_: ^ [14:48] Makyo: ok cool then [14:48] right, back to figuring out what to look at. :p [14:48] Makyo: so you're two birds one-stone there Makyo ? [14:49] rick_h_, Looking at the card, I'm not sure how much still applies. I can't find that text in my QA so far, but a lot has changed. [14:49] Makyo: yea, that text was replaced in a drive by [14:50] Makyo: there's the current issue of two bars (top/bottom) and there's no support for add machines to the list of messages/summary [14:50] rick_h_, okay. I'll add that to this card and go through the rest of the list. [14:50] Makyo: the icons show now, that was hatch's attempt to avoid collisions [14:50] Makyo: so updating the card for the two items remaining [14:51] yeah I borked that [14:51] but I think that's all fixed now [14:51] yea, all good [14:51] as long as we all ack you can only have one unit of any service in ghost lol [14:51] Makyo when following your QAsteps.js are we supposed to get ghost machines? [14:51] rick_h_ haha, this demo better be very scripted :) [14:52] hatch: trying to work on that for sure [14:52] hatch, all my branch did was ensure ECS called addMachines properly; no UI [14:52] Makyo: so to be clear, you're handling the deployer bar rendering goofily up top? [14:52] Makyo ahh ok cool, I've just been using those steps to qa other stuff and was curious [14:53] jcsackett, Yes, if that's alright. [14:53] jcsackett: so there's some qa work or looking at the polish cards, or helping pair with anyone and helping to do reviews/landings as they come up [14:53] rick_h_: dig. [14:53] jujugui: who needs PR/QA? i appear to be super free. [14:53] I've got to start work on the demo script and notes. [14:54] jcsackett: so I think we're all set atm, but hopefullyu will have some coming down the pipe [14:54] kadams54: did you dupe the issue in your card? [14:54] kadams54: or is that all set? [14:54] jcsackett you can go through the codebase with rubber gloves and some solvent to clean up all the new tech debt [14:54] haha jk it's actually not that bad [14:54] hatch: heh, save that for tomorrow [14:54] there will be a "great post-demo audit!" [14:55] but not today [14:55] enough moving parts atm [14:55] i'm looking at the two polish cards, and will be on interrupt for PRs and QA. [14:55] rick_h_: well, yes, it seems to be fixed. However I'm seeing some other odd behavior. [14:55] kadams54: ok [14:55] jujugui call in 5 [14:56] Hmm, strike that… I'm seeing "no uncommitted changes" again. Different route to reproduce it though. [14:56] rick_h_: you know, it is a little redonkulous that we don't deploy charmworld with a bundle in real life. [14:56] bac: +1 [14:57] bac: I've wanted to bring up with IS about managing a bundle file except they do the custom local charm stuff which bundles don't support [14:57] bac: but for our QA env we want to setup I was looking at trying to create/use a bundle for that [14:57] rick_h_ https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/pull/303#discussion_r12510773 are we not dropping on a readily created container for the demo? Can I instead just console.log the information - I'm scared to introduce a bug pre-demo by adding addMachine here [14:58] hatch: we are dropping on a pre-existing machine to create a new container [14:58] crap that is not what my code does [14:58] so we have to addMachine with a real parent and make a new lxc container [14:58] rick_h_: the qa env is live. i launched it. next time i'll use a bundle rather than the deploy script orange wrote [14:58] Got the deployer bar thing; copy-paste problem. [14:58] doh [14:59] thanks Makyo [14:59] hatch: ok, well that's the demo. Existing openstack bundle, deploy nagios and co-locate it on an existing openstack service machine in a new lxc container [14:59] yeah I must have misunderstood - I thought that it was being dragged to an existing container [15:00] it's ok I just need to add drop support to the machine tokens [15:00] hatch: it's the header that you drop on [15:00] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lvdydgiu7jeuuso/7MlRX5-IPu#lh:null-06-machine.png [15:00] no that creates a new machine/container, we need to create a new container in a machine [15:00] so you drop on the machine [15:00] you've selected the first machine, and drop on the header "Create new container" which we can hardcode to a new lxc [15:01] right, the grey means that the machine is selected [15:01] oh boy [15:01] and a big "Create new container" drop target [15:01] jujugui hangout [15:01] man where did I get the idea to drop on a container [15:04] jujugui: is this fatal state from 'juju status'? agent-state-info: '(error: no instance types in us-west-2 matching constrain [15:04] ts [15:04] "cpu-cores=1 cpu-power=100 mem=2048M root-disk=20480M")' [15:05] or will it continue with best attemp? [15:05] s/attemp/attempt/ [15:12] rick_h_ can you hop back in? [15:13] just want to confirm the interaction for the drag and drop [15:13] frankban: do you know the answer to my question ^^^? [15:13] hatch: joining [15:13] jujugui: quick note, i have a doctor's appt in 2 hours--historically the appt is short, the time in the waiting room is long. i'll have wifi so still ping me and i can do PRs QA, but i'll be unable to do to hangouts for a bit then. [15:14] bac: what machine is returning that error? [15:15] frankban: the one for elasticsearch and mongo. is that your question? [15:16] bac: yes, I am not sure you can recover that. IIRC resolved only works with units. So maybe destroy-machine and add another one? [15:17] jcsackett: rgr [15:17] frankban: ok. i wonder which of those constraints is causing the problem... [15:18] bac: I think the cpu-power or the root-disk [15:18] bac: I'd drop those two and see what happens [15:18] having both core and power I don't know makes sense, I think it's either/or but not 100% sure [15:19] huh, i didn't specify the cpu-power one. juju must've helpfully added it for me. [15:19] heh, you co cool juju [15:21] that helps me narrow it down, though [15:28] During standup today I realized that I may just be slow on the uptake… is the "no inspector" thing the reason why the inspector no longer shows up when you deploy a charm? [15:30] heh yes [15:30] kadams54: yep [15:30] last minute mandate that's falling apart in real life [15:30] Now things make sense. [15:31] Well, more than 30 minutes ago. [15:31] :D [15:32] OK, so on my card… should I update it to be specific to when undeployed (ghost) stuff is deleted? [15:32] kadams54: definitely [15:38] Hmm, found another variation that may be more problematic for the demo. [15:38] kadams54: k, good to know [15:38] If you drop a second charm, it triggers the message again [15:39] 'triggers the message'? [15:39] Yeah, "no uncommitted changes". [15:39] kadams54: call? [15:39] Sure [15:40] kadams54: let's just hit the standup hangout [15:40] k [15:47] wahoo! we have replication [15:47] rick_h_: Nice to know I'm less crazy-ish. [15:48] yea, know that feeling [15:57] * rick_h_ goes to take a lunch break [16:02] hmm this interaction feels very clunky [16:02] definitely need to get it infront of luca [16:03] hatch: + 1, I think the manual clicky method will be the better placement story to be honest [16:03] hatch: but Mark S wants the drag/drop GUI experience so we're doing that first [16:03] yeah I just find I'm switching back and forth a lot, just doesn't quite feel right [16:03] ok, now really to lunch [16:03] lol [16:04] jujugui https://github.com/juju/juju-gui/pull/312 for some intermediary work on the UI polish [16:04] Makyo: looking now. [16:07] Man, what happened to my pre-push hook? :( [16:18] Makyo: i have had lots of trouble with pre-push hooks, of late. [16:31] Makyo: thanks for updates, QAing now. [16:33] jcsackett, thanks! We're in a hurry, but you're right about the test, I'm getting one in real quick. [16:34] Makyo: thanks! [16:37] it works! it fracking works! [16:37] Makyo: you said note the machine key in your QA instructions...do you mean the "addMachines-$number", or what? [16:37] frankban: \o/ [16:37] rick_h_: I fixed the issue, but I also found this: http://pastie.org/private/hayd1bhhcmy81k4ycabfg [16:37] ugh so many conflicts [16:38] rick_h_: With which I agree. Why are notifications hidden after 2 sec? Can we remove that? [16:38] jcsackett, yes [16:38] kadams54: there's two moving parts here [16:38] Makyo: ok, thanks. [16:38] the notification is in the bar while it's closed state and disappears after 2s [16:38] kadams54: that we want [16:39] kadams54: it's got a side effect of doing something that clears the data in the summary [16:39] jcsackett, the parentId, until frankban's changes land, is 'addMachines-123' or whatever. [16:39] kadams54: that's the bug [16:39] Yeah, I fixed the side effect [16:39] But why do we clear after 2 sec? [16:39] Makyo: oh, the whole string? not just the number? [16:39] Why not just leave the notify there until something else comes along? [16:39] kadams54: ok, then yea. We do want that notification to fade away. It's a notification, it's temporal by design? [16:39] jcsackett, yeah, sorry [16:39] jujugui: please take a look at http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/7453150/ [16:39] It's too quick [16:40] Makyo: no worries. [16:40] jujugui: that shows the steps I am following with my current branch, and the API to use to place units and add ghost machines/containers [16:40] jujugui: note that new1 is arbitrary [16:40] frankban: just discussing your comment here: http://pastie.org/private/hayd1bhhcmy81k4ycabfg :-) [16:41] rick_h_: The notification is often gone before I get a chance to read it [16:41] kadams54: right, but it's ack'ing that you did something. I don't know that hanging around until you do something else is attractive either [16:41] Makyo: to view change summary i click the "changes" thing in the left of the deployer bar, right? [16:41] it's the old 'highlight in yellow the new item' trick [16:42] jcsackett: no, click deploy [16:42] jcsackett: that changes doesn't work yet [16:42] jcsackett, click deploy, it'll ask for a confi--yeah [16:42] Yeah, highlighting is fine if it's the same area on the screen that you're currently focused. The notifications are not. I'm OK with clearing them, but after 10 or 15 seconds at least. [16:43] kadams54: we can add that as a discussion for follow up but with luca out and ant at a sprint I don't know we can get good UX feedback on the issue [16:43] Yup [16:43] kadams54: cool, not sure on 10, but double it maybe? [16:43] I'll leave frankban's comment in there for the moment [16:43] k [16:44] Makyo: time for a hand off call? [16:44] frankban, sure [16:44] frankban: Makyo can I get a listening invite please? [16:44] rick_h_: sure [16:44] kadams54: ok, so how about we double it and mark it as a UX item to chat bout [16:45] lots of interactions we're not really thrilled about in this [16:45] Makyo, rick_h_: see http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/7453193/ [16:45] kk [16:45] ugh merge conflicts are gona kill me [16:46] Makyo: qa ok, thanks for the test, though i note we're skipping it? [16:46] rick_h_, Makyo https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/canonical.com/daily-standup [16:46] hatch: :( was worried about that with the long running branch there this weekend [16:46]