On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Tim Penhey <tim.pen...@canonical.com> wrote: > On 17/04/14 13:24, David Cheney wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Tim Penhey <tim.pen...@canonical.com> >> wrote: >>> On 17/04/14 13:20, David Cheney wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Go 1.3 beta will ship this week, or at some point before the >>>> conference on the 24th. >>>> >>>> For a long time Go 1.3 beta could not build Juju properly, the tests >>>> would crash the runtime and other strange issues. >>>> >>>> I've been able to work with the upstream to provide them with a >>>> working trusty image and Juju development environment (let's hear it >>>> for the ubuntu charm!!) so they could reproduce and debug the issue. >>>> >>>> This isn't the first time that Juju has broken the Go trunk, in the >>>> previous 1.2 cycle, Juju code showed up some interesting reflection >>>> and escape analysis bugs. >>> >>> So are you saying that the juju codebase exercises conditions that >>> aren't covered in upstream golang tests? >> >> Yes >> >>> >>> Are they adding tests so it doesn't happen again? >> >> Yes > > This is actually kinda cool.
I'm glad that we can help make Go more reliable. Issues which have been reported in the past on closed source codebases have required significant hoop jumping to get to the point of a reproducable test case. As an open source project we can help the upstream reproduce issues by just pointing them to our source and helping them get there development environment going. All I did was deploy cs:trusty/ubuntu, checkout juju and run make install-dependencies, then handed over the keys. > > Is there a release log for 1.3 that describes the changes from 1.2? It's being written, we're still > 4 weeks out from release, so is not complete, http://tip.golang.org/doc/go1.3 > Tim > -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
