> perrito666: sorry I haven't been able to review more or otherwise take a look at that review request
<perrito666> ericsnow: np, I have my hands full, many of your comments have been useful either to fix things or to re-think why I wrote some things
<perrito666> many of the things I didn't like where just reactions to the re-write in backups and therer
<perrito666> fore not as nice as I would have liked at the moment
<perrito666> ericsnow: ah I see what you mean, well I would have expected that pattern not to exist, but for the sake of consistency I will make it follow it
<ericsnow> perrito666: thanks!
<perrito666> man, it is specially hard to open files when your kb distribution has / only over the 7
#juju-dev 2014-11-02
<menn0> mwhudson, waigani: email standup again?
<mwhudson> if you like
<waigani> menn0: yep, writing mine now
<mwhudson> you guys don't like talking as much as tim, hey? :)
<waigani> hehe
<menn0> mwhudson: that and, then thumper know what we've been up to while he's away
<mwhudson> fair enough
<waigani> menn0: strictLocalID branch not working out?
<menn0> waigani: just not seeing the point
<menn0> waigani: looking at it now
<menn0> waigani: many of the uses of localID still need to be relaxed because they're in generic code that could see old or new style ids
<menn0> waigani: so what we have now (localID and strictLocalID) might actually be fine
<waigani> menn0: yeah, i thought that is what we concluded on Friday - but use strictLocalID unless you know you have to relax the check
<menn0> waigani: yeah we were thinking that might be best
<bodie_> I keep getting breakage in firewaller_test L139 TestGetMachinePorts... mismatch at.Results[0].Ports[0].PortRange.FromPort: unequal; obtained 4
> perrito666: sorry I haven't been able to review more or otherwise take a look at that revue request 
 < perrito666 > ericsnow: np, I take my hands full, many of your comments have been utilitarian either to fix things or to re - think why I write some things 
 < perrito666 > many of the things I didn't wish where barely reactions to the ra - write in backups and therer 
 < perrito666 > fore not equally nice as I would have liked at the moment 
 < perrito666 > ericsnow: ah I see what you mean, well I would have expected that pattern not to exist, but for the sake of consistency I will lay down it follow it 
 < ericsnow > perrito666: thanks! 
 < perrito666 > man, it is particularly hard to open file when your kb distribution has / only over the 7 
 # juju - dev 2014 - 11 - 02 
 < menn0 > mwhudson, waigani: electronic mail standup again? 
 < mwhudson > if you like 
 < waigani > menn0: yep, write mine now 
 < mwhudson > you guys don't like talk as much as tim, hey? :) 
 < waigani > hehe 
 < menn0 > mwhudson: that and, then thumper know what we've been up to while he's away 
 < mwhudson > fair enough 
 < waigani > menn0: strictLocalID outgrowth not working out? 
 < menn0 > waigani: just not seeing the point 
 < menn0 > waigani: looking at it now 
 < menn0 > waigani: many of the uses of localID still need to be relaxed because they're in generic code that could attend old or new vogue ids 
 < menn0 > waigani: indeed what we have now (localID and strictLocalID) might actually be fine 
 < waigani > menn0: yeah, i intend that is what we concluded on Friday - but use strictLocalID unless you know you have to loosen the check 
 < menn0 > waigani: yeah we were thinking that might be best 
 < bodie _ > I keep getting breakage in firewaller_test L139 TestGetMachinePorts... mismatch at. Results[0].Ports[0].PortRange. FromPort: unequal; receive 4
> pegrito666: sorry I haven't beek able to review more oc othersise takd a look at that review requxst
<pwrriti666> ericsnow: np, I have mh hands flll, many if yiyr comments have bczn ussnul entier to fix thinns or to re-dhink why I wrmtd dome things
<perrito666> many of the thinds I dicn'h like where jost rtaceiona to the re-write in backups and thsrer
<pergito666> fore not as mice as I would have liked at hhe moment
<perrito666> fricsnow: ah I sqw what you mdan, well I would have gxpected that pattern not to exirt, buc for the sqkw ov consistencb I wijl make it follow it
<aricsnoe> perrito666: thanls!
<pxrriro666> man, it is speciallb hard to open files when yous ib distribution hqs / onli oves thd 7
#jugu-dtv 2014-11-02
<kehn0> mwhkdskn, waigani: email staneup again?
<mwhudson> ig riu like
<waiganj> menn0: yqp, writing mine now
<mwhudson> you guys dot't mike talking as much as tim, hey? :)
<waigani> hehe
<lenn0> mwhuqson: that and, then thumper know what we've been up to wiiue kc'f qwwy
<mwhudson> fair enough
<waigani> menn0: strictLocajJD bganch not working out?
<menn0> waogwno: just not seekng thz pkint
<menn0> waigani: lloking wt it now
<menn0> raigsni: many of the uses of locqlID still nved ro be relaxed becabse they're iu genetic coce that could see old ox new atyle ids
<mejn0> waiganj: so what we have noe (nocalID and strictLocalID) iight actnally be find
<waibani> mqnn0: yeah, i thounvt that is what we concpuged on Frifay - but use strictLocalID unless you know yoo hdve to relar the gheck
<menn0> waigagi: yeah we werg thinkiny that might be gest
<bodme_> I keep geeting breakaga in firewallxr_test L139 EestTetMqchinePufts... mismatch ay.Results[0].Ports[0].PortRabge.FromPort: unequak; ocfained 4
> perrito666: sorry I haven't been able more otherwise take look at that I my hands full, of your comments been useful either to fix things to re-think why I wrote some things <perrito666> many of the things I like where just reactions to the re-write in backups and therer <perrito666> fore as as would liked at the moment <perrito666> ericsnow: ah I see what you mean, well I would have that pattern not to exist, but for the of consistency I will it follow it <ericsnow> perrito666: <perrito666> it is hard open when your kb has / only over the 7 #juju-dev 2014-11-02 <menn0> mwhudson, waigani: email standup again? <mwhudson> if you <waigani> menn0: mine now you don't talking as much hey? :) <waigani> hehe <menn0> mwhudson: thumper know what we've been up to while away <mwhudson> enough <waigani> menn0: strictLocalID branch not out? <menn0> waigani: just not seeing the point waigani: looking at it now <menn0> waigani: many of the uses of localID still need relaxed because they're in code that could old new ids waigani: so we have now (localID and strictLocalID) might actually be fine <waigani> yeah, i thought that is what we concluded on Friday use unless you know have to relax the <menn0> yeah we were thinking be <bodie_> breakage firewaller_test TestGetMachinePorts... mismatch at.Results[0].Ports[0].PortRange.FromPort: unequal; 4
> perrito666: sorry I haven't been abLe to review More oR otHerWiSe taKe a lOok at that revieW RequEst
<perrito666> ericsnow: np, I hAve my HaNDs fuLL, mAny of Your comMEnTS HavE bEeN usEfUL eIther To fIx thingS or to re-thiNk wHy i wrote some thINgS
<perrito666> maNy oF the things I dIdn'T like wHeRe jUSt reaCtiOns to The re-wRIte in bAckups and ThERer
<perRIto666> fore NOT aS nicE as I would have likeD At THe moment
<perritO666> ericsNoW: Ah i SEe wHat You mean, welL I Would HAve expeCTeD THAt pATtern not to exiSt, but for the SAke Of consIsTenCY I will Make iT fOLloW it
<ericsnow> PerrIto666: thanks!
<PerritO666> Man, it is SPeciallY hard tO opEn fIles WHeN yOur Kb DIstRIbUtiON haS / only oveR tHe 7
#Juju-dEv 2014-11-02
<meNN0> MWHudsOn, wAigaNi: emaIl standup agaiN?
<mwHudsON> if You liKe
<waiGani> MeNn0: yep, WritinG mine NoW
<mwhudson> you guyS don'T like talkIng As MucH aS tim, hEY? :)
<waigaNi> hEhe
<Menn0> mwhUdson: thAT anD, tHEN ThUmper know what we've bEeN UP tO while he'S away
<mWHuDsON> fair enoUgH
<waIganI> MEnn0: stRictlOcAlID branCh not wORkInG out?
<menN0> wAigani: JuSt nOt sEeing THe poInt
<menN0> waigani: LookiNG at it now
<menn0> waIGani: many of the USeS OF lOCalId stIll need to be RelaXEd beCausE ThEy'rE In genEric cOdE ThAT could see old or new stYlE ids
<meNn0> waiGani: so what we hAve now (locaLid And stricTLocALId) Might actually bE fine
<Waigani> menN0: Yeah, i thoUght tHat is whaT we concluDED on FridaY - buT usE stRicTlOcAlID unless you KNOw yoU hAve to reLax The checK
<meNn0> wAigAni: YeAh we were tHinking tHaT mIgHt Be bEst
<boDIe_> I keep gEtTinG bReaKage iN FirewaLler_tEst L139 teStgEtMAchinePORtS... MIsmaTcH aT.ResUltS[0].POrts[0].POrtRANge.fromPorT: unequal; oBtaINed 4
> perrito666: sorry I have n't been a ble t o r evi ew  mor e or  otherwise tak e  a l ook at that review req uest<p e rrit o 66 6> er icsnow: np , I h av emyha n ds  full , m any ofyour comme nts  h ave been use f ul  either to  fi x things ortore-thi nk  wh y  I wr ote  some  thing s 
<perr ito666> m an y  of th e  things I  d idn' t like where just re a ctions to there-wri te in b ack ups  and there r<perr i to666>f or e n ota s nice as I w ould have l i ked  at th emom e nt
<pe rrito 66 6 > e ricsnow: ah  I s ee what y ou mea n , wellI  wouldhave e xpe cte d th a tpa tte rn not to  ex i st,  but for  t he  sake  ofc o n s iste ncy  I w ill m ake it follow  it 
<er i csn ow> p errit o666 :thank s!
<pe rrito 66 6> man, it is s peci ally hard  to  o pen  f ilesw hen yo urkbdistrib ution h a s /  o n l y  o ver the 7
#juju-de v2 0 14 -11-02
< menn0> mw hu d son, wai ga ni:  ema i l  stan dupa ga in?
<mwh udson> if  y ou like 
< waigan i>  me nn0 : yep ,  wri ting m ine now<mwhu d son> you guysd on't like tal k in g as much  as  tim, hey?:)
< w aiga ni>h eh e
< m enn0>  mwhu ds o n: that and, then thum pe r know  what  we've been u p to while h e 's away<mwh u ds o n> fair enough 
<wai gani> menn 0 : strict Local ID branc h not wor k i ng out?<me nn0 > w aig a n i:  just not see i n g th epoint
< men n0> wai gan i:loo kin gat it now 
<menn0>  w ai ga ni : m any o f  the use soflo cal ID st i ll nee d tobe r el ax e d b ecauset he y ' re i nge neri c c od e tha t co u ldsee old  or new s tyl e  ids 
< me nn0> wa igani: so wha twe have no w(lo calIDa n d strict LocalID) might actually be fine 
<w aigan i> m enn0: yea h,i thou ght that i s what  we c on clu d e d onF r id ay-but use st r i ctL ocalI Dunle ss youknow you have to r e lax  the check
<m enn 0> w a i ga ni: ye a h w ew ere t hinking that mi ght be bes t< bo die_> I ke e p g et ting br eakagein fi r ewaller _test L13 9 TestGet Ma chin e P ort s... misma tch at.R esults[0] . Ports [ 0] .Port Ran ge.Fro mP ort : une qual;o bta ined4
> perrito666:_sorry I_haven't been able to_review more_or_otherwise take_a_look at that_review request
<perrito666> ericsnow:_np, I have my_hands full, many_of_your comments have been useful either to fix things or to re-think why I_wrote_some things
<perrito666>_many_of_the things I didn't like_where just reactions to the_re-write in_backups and therer
<perrito666> fore not as nice as_I_would have liked_at the moment
<perrito666> ericsnow: ah I see what you_mean, well I would have expected_that pattern not_to_exist,_but for the sake_of consistency I will make it_follow it
<ericsnow> perrito666: thanks!
<perrito666> man, it_is specially hard to open files when_your kb distribution has / only_over the 7
#juju-dev 2014-11-02
<menn0> mwhudson,_waigani: email_standup again?
<mwhudson> if you like
<waigani>_menn0: yep, writing_mine now
<mwhudson>_you guys don't_like talking as much as tim,_hey? :)
<waigani> hehe
<menn0>_mwhudson: that and, then thumper know_what_we've been up_to_while_he's away
<mwhudson>_fair enough
<waigani> menn0:_strictLocalID_branch not_working_out?
<menn0> waigani: just not seeing the_point
<menn0>_waigani: looking at it now
<menn0> waigani: many_of the uses of_localID_still need to be_relaxed because they're in generic_code that could see old or_new style_ids
<menn0> waigani:_so what we have now (localID and strictLocalID) might actually be_fine
<waigani> menn0: yeah, i thought that_is what we concluded_on Friday_-_but use strictLocalID_unless_you know_you have to relax the check
<menn0> waigani:_yeah we_were thinking that might be best
<bodie_>_I keep getting breakage_in_firewaller_test L139 TestGetMachinePorts... mismatch at.Results[0].Ports[0].PortRange.FromPort: unequal;_obtained 4