New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Set prompts to be more consistent #12782

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 17, 2015

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@nik9000
Contributor

nik9000 commented Aug 10, 2015

Also a small amount of cleanup in the way we create VMs - just a bit less
repetition.

Prompts are always of the form "box:cwd$ ". Even for root. Which is ok because
you don't have to be that careful with root because these are VMs that you
can destroy and recreate quickly.

Vagrant tests: set prompts to be more consistent
Also a small amount of cleanup in the way we create VMs - just a bit less
repetition.

Prompts are always of the form "box:cwd$ ". Even for root. Which is ok because
you don't have to be that careful with root because these are VMs that you
can destroy and recreate quickly.
@nik9000

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nik9000

nik9000 Aug 14, 2015

Contributor

Ping @tlrx or @dakrone for review - just a tiny bit of vagrant cleanup.

Contributor

nik9000 commented Aug 14, 2015

Ping @tlrx or @dakrone for review - just a tiny bit of vagrant cleanup.

@dakrone

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dakrone

dakrone Aug 14, 2015

Member

@nik9000 you're just trying to get our Ruby percentage up over 0.1% so we can be truly polyglot right? Let me try to remember all the ruby I used to do for reviewing this... :)

Member

dakrone commented Aug 14, 2015

@nik9000 you're just trying to get our Ruby percentage up over 0.1% so we can be truly polyglot right? Let me try to remember all the ruby I used to do for reviewing this... :)

@nik9000

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nik9000

nik9000 Aug 14, 2015

Contributor

@nik9000 you're just trying to get our Ruby percentage up over 0.1% so we can be truly polyglot right? Let me try to remember all the ruby I used to do for reviewing this... :)

Thanks! Its mostly shell in heredocs in ruby though. Which probably confuses github.

Contributor

nik9000 commented Aug 14, 2015

@nik9000 you're just trying to get our Ruby percentage up over 0.1% so we can be truly polyglot right? Let me try to remember all the ruby I used to do for reviewing this... :)

Thanks! Its mostly shell in heredocs in ruby though. Which probably confuses github.

@tlrx

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tlrx

tlrx Aug 17, 2015

Member

LGTM

Member

tlrx commented Aug 17, 2015

LGTM

@dakrone

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dakrone

dakrone Aug 17, 2015

Member

Prompt stuff looks good to me too, however, I do get Vagrant failures for RPM removal on centos-7 - https://gist.github.com/dakrone/b499a9de41e76008a48b

Member

dakrone commented Aug 17, 2015

Prompt stuff looks good to me too, however, I do get Vagrant failures for RPM removal on centos-7 - https://gist.github.com/dakrone/b499a9de41e76008a48b

@nik9000

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nik9000

nik9000 Aug 17, 2015

Contributor

Prompt stuff looks good to me too, however, I do get Vagrant failures for RPM removal on centos-7 - https://gist.github.com/dakrone/b499a9de41e76008a48b

I'm reasonably sure that is fixed in master and we'd have to rebase to get that passing on this pr. Or I could just merge it and master should just pass. Rather, master passes for me right now and should continue to do so with this merged in.

Contributor

nik9000 commented Aug 17, 2015

Prompt stuff looks good to me too, however, I do get Vagrant failures for RPM removal on centos-7 - https://gist.github.com/dakrone/b499a9de41e76008a48b

I'm reasonably sure that is fixed in master and we'd have to rebase to get that passing on this pr. Or I could just merge it and master should just pass. Rather, master passes for me right now and should continue to do so with this merged in.

@dakrone

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dakrone

dakrone Aug 17, 2015

Member

+1, that's fine, this is only to change prompts

Member

dakrone commented Aug 17, 2015

+1, that's fine, this is only to change prompts

nik9000 added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2015

Merge pull request #12782 from nik9000/prompts_2
Set prompts to be more consistent

@nik9000 nik9000 merged commit f5735e8 into elastic:master Aug 17, 2015

1 check passed

CLA Commit author has signed the CLA
Details
@nik9000

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nik9000

nik9000 Aug 17, 2015

Contributor

Merged.

Contributor

nik9000 commented Aug 17, 2015

Merged.

@nik9000 nik9000 added the v2.0.0 label Aug 17, 2015

@colings86

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@colings86

colings86 Aug 21, 2015

Member

@nik9000 this doesn't seem to have been backported to the 2.0 branch. Should it be backported?

Member

colings86 commented Aug 21, 2015

@nik9000 this doesn't seem to have been backported to the 2.0 branch. Should it be backported?

@nik9000

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nik9000

nik9000 Aug 21, 2015

Contributor

Ahk. No it was supposed to be 2.1 only. I have no idea why I labeled it that way. There isn't really any advantage to pulling this into 2.0.

Contributor

nik9000 commented Aug 21, 2015

Ahk. No it was supposed to be 2.1 only. I have no idea why I labeled it that way. There isn't really any advantage to pulling this into 2.0.

@nik9000 nik9000 added v2.1.0 and removed v2.0.0 labels Aug 21, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment