00:16:12  * jenkins-monitorquit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:16:21  * jenkins-monitorjoined
00:16:24  * node-ghjoined
00:16:24  * node-ghpart
00:19:28  * node-ghjoined
00:19:28  * node-ghpart
00:19:35  * imyllerquit (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
00:19:36  * node-ghjoined
00:19:36  * node-ghpart
00:20:04  * jenkins-monitorquit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:20:11  * jenkins-monitorjoined
00:21:28  * node-ghjoined
00:21:28  * node-ghpart
00:22:35  * node-ghjoined
00:22:35  * node-ghpart
00:22:50  * node-ghjoined
00:22:50  * node-ghpart
00:23:21  * node-ghjoined
00:23:21  * node-ghpart
00:24:22  * node-ghjoined
00:24:22  * node-ghpart
00:25:04  * jenkins-monitorquit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:25:14  * jenkins-monitorjoined
00:30:03  * jenkins-monitorquit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:30:11  * jenkins-monitorjoined
00:36:32  * jenkins-monitorquit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:36:39  * jenkins-monitorjoined
00:39:04  * Trottquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
00:40:03  * jenkins-monitorquit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:40:11  * jenkins-monitorjoined
00:40:13  * Trottjoined
01:40:35  * node-ghjoined
01:40:35  * node-ghpart
01:47:25  * node-ghjoined
01:47:25  * node-ghpart
01:52:23  * node-ghjoined
01:52:23  * node-ghpart
01:55:03  * node-ghjoined
01:55:03  * node-ghpart
02:11:02  <evanlucas>any idea why https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commitmsg/ is stuck pending?
02:11:29  <jbergstroem>let me check
02:11:35  <evanlucas>maybe I'm just not patient enough :p
02:11:36  <jbergstroem>doens't lock stuck to me
02:11:39  <evanlucas>lol
02:11:42  <jbergstroem>*look
02:11:42  <evanlucas>sorry, false alarm
02:15:32  <evanlucas>jbergstroem any ideas why it is failing now?
02:15:44  <evanlucas>Duplicated TAP plan found
02:15:57  <evanlucas>should we be removing validate.tap after the run?
02:16:07  <jbergstroem>2sec
03:10:32  * not-an-aardvarkjoined
04:46:53  * node-ghjoined
04:46:54  * node-ghpart
05:02:30  * node-ghjoined
05:02:30  * node-ghpart
05:26:44  * node-ghjoined
05:26:45  * node-ghpart
05:54:28  * imyllerjoined
06:12:46  * node-ghjoined
06:12:46  * node-ghpart
08:46:09  * node-ghjoined
08:46:09  * node-ghpart
08:51:10  * node-ghjoined
08:51:10  * node-ghpart
09:03:04  * not-an-aardvarkquit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
09:59:49  * node-ghjoined
09:59:49  * node-ghpart
10:03:25  * node-ghjoined
10:03:25  * node-ghpart
10:27:34  * evanlucasquit (Remote host closed the connection)
10:31:58  * evanlucasjoined
10:37:25  * thealphanerdquit (Quit: farewell for now)
10:37:56  * thealphanerdjoined
11:52:05  * node-ghjoined
11:52:05  * node-ghpart
11:56:15  * node-ghjoined
11:56:15  * node-ghpart
12:42:35  <evanlucas>jbergstroem ever figure out what was going on with those builds failing?
12:42:42  <evanlucas>(the commit message ones)
12:43:01  <jbergstroem>evanlucas: sorry; was late and my mind went somewhere else
12:43:04  <jbergstroem>let me check now
12:43:08  <evanlucas>jbergstroem no problem at all :]
12:44:49  <jbergstroem>ouch the ci looks very sad
12:45:10  <jbergstroem>i think one of the reasons threads freak out like this (subjobs done, job still pending) is because of jenkins freezing while in communication
12:48:15  <jbergstroem>ok, jobs are going back to normal
12:48:18  <jbergstroem>evanlucas: checking now
12:48:56  <jbergstroem>interesting
12:48:58  <jbergstroem>never seen that
12:49:52  <jbergstroem>evanlucas: looks like the output is appended to the file
12:49:58  <evanlucas>ah
12:50:00  <jbergstroem>not nulled out in between
12:50:13  <evanlucas>but will that mean that only the last run will have the tap results?
12:50:21  <jbergstroem>no
12:50:24  <evanlucas>k
12:50:27  <jbergstroem>the results are parsed and stored
12:50:28  <evanlucas>fixing now
12:50:34  <jbergstroem>cool
12:54:14  <evanlucas>wait, doesn't fs.createWriteStream use the w flag by default?
12:56:39  * imyllerquit (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
13:03:21  * chorrelljoined
13:12:24  <jbergstroem>it does
13:12:48  <evanlucas>so, shouldn't that overwrite the file?
13:12:52  <evanlucas>instead of appending to it?
13:36:58  <jbergstroem>yes
13:37:02  <jbergstroem>:|
13:37:27  <jbergstroem>do you write both to file and stdout?
13:38:21  <jbergstroem>hm
13:38:22  <jbergstroem>i wonder
13:38:28  <jbergstroem>are both cases being hit somehow?
13:38:39  <jbergstroem>shouldn't matter though.
13:38:52  <jbergstroem>if it truly appends a new run should make it three
13:40:31  <jbergstroem>ahh.
13:40:50  <jbergstroem>its two commits. results written into same file
13:41:13  <evanlucas>what are the contents of the file?
13:41:58  <jbergstroem>https://gist.github.com/jbergstroem/a1f09a3f1974e3dbf214b93a1c5997fc
13:42:20  <jbergstroem>thinking that's a bug
13:42:41  <evanlucas>is it because we start over at 1 for each commit?
13:44:11  <evanlucas>ah i see it now
13:44:18  <evanlucas>hang on, let me publish and it should be fixed
13:44:27  <jbergstroem>cool
13:44:54  <evanlucas>ok, core-validate-commit@3.0.0 is published
13:54:11  <evanlucas>ill be able to play with it more this afternoon. Thanks for the help jbergstroem!
13:54:18  <jbergstroem>np
13:54:19  <jbergstroem>ill update
13:54:28  <evanlucas>cool, thanks!
13:54:47  * evanlucasquit (Remote host closed the connection)
14:18:34  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: ohai?
14:38:39  <jbergstroem>evanlucas: works now https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commitmsg/23/tapTestReport/
14:44:20  * node-ghjoined
14:44:20  * node-ghpart
14:45:04  * node-ghjoined
14:45:04  * node-ghpart
14:47:15  * node-ghjoined
14:47:16  * node-ghpart
14:55:05  * node-ghjoined
14:55:06  * node-ghpart
14:57:01  * imyllerjoined
14:57:32  * node-ghjoined
14:57:32  * node-ghpart
14:57:45  * node-ghjoined
14:57:46  * node-ghpart
14:58:07  * node-ghjoined
14:58:07  * node-ghpart
14:58:30  * node-ghjoined
14:58:31  * node-ghpart
15:06:51  <jbergstroem>test with tap13 output: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit/5580/
15:09:15  <mhdawson>Taking AIX machines off line for a few minutes to do small update to ansible config
15:09:19  <mhdawson>should be back in 5
15:15:54  <jbergstroem>looks like the tap parser at least seems to eat it
15:25:43  * evanlucasjoined
15:27:16  <jbergstroem>evanlucas: works now https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commitmsg/23/tapTestReport/
15:29:13  <evanlucas>sweet
15:29:19  <evanlucas>thanks!
15:51:50  * not-an-aardvarkjoined
16:08:45  <thealphanerd>jbergstroem you rang?
16:11:51  <thealphanerd>the output is a "bit" off
16:12:06  <thealphanerd>https://gist.github.com/TheAlphaNerd/9f2d08045232543db4d3ef257b094346
16:12:09  <thealphanerd>example tap output
16:12:46  <thealphanerd>I think it should be stack not trace
16:21:30  <jbergstroem>i don't think its defined
16:21:39  <jbergstroem>i'll just rename
16:28:33  * chorrellquit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com)
16:28:58  * chorrelljoined
16:32:54  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: will fix soon.
16:33:03  <thealphanerd>:D
17:15:58  * chorrellquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
17:21:06  * node-ghjoined
17:21:07  * node-ghpart
17:37:55  * node-ghjoined
17:37:55  * node-ghpart
17:39:35  * node-ghjoined
17:39:35  * node-ghpart
18:52:17  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: so all i have to do is chnage to stack then?
18:52:22  <thealphanerd>I think so
18:52:25  <thealphanerd>¯\_(ツ)_/¯
18:53:17  <jbergstroem>perhaps grab the output from the test i ran and replace trace with stack; see if we get junit out?
18:57:52  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: (so i know if other changes are neededd)
18:58:10  <jbergstroem>also, do we hide this behind a new flag? I don't really see why we'd stick with the old format
18:58:37  <thealphanerd>I think other companies like IBM are running the suite internally
18:58:46  <thealphanerd>and it may change their CI output
18:59:04  <thealphanerd>I think we had agree to put it behind another flag for now
18:59:08  <thealphanerd>and swap it in a major
19:07:20  <jbergstroem>or we land it into major (7x)
19:07:24  <jbergstroem>then backport it witih flag?
19:14:01  * imyllerquit (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
19:28:19  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: lmk how you go with the tap2junit and i'll adjust
19:28:35  <thealphanerd>that sounds good to me
19:28:41  <thealphanerd>I'll hack on the tap2junit stuff tomorrow
19:28:50  <thealphanerd>can you pass me a gist with some tap output?
19:31:04  * chorrelljoined
19:37:48  <jbergstroem>https://gist.github.com/jbergstroem/1a821d636268bc18b33e7a3b7c51c554
20:00:08  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: u can has download it from here too: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-freebsd/4789/nodes=freebsd11-x64/
20:00:47  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: argh, wrong branch
20:01:53  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: you can pull from this test in 5min: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-freebsd/4790/
20:13:30  * chorrellquit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com)
20:28:53  * evanlucasquit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
20:50:37  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: also, if you want to help me parse out the message/line from the traceback feel free :-D
21:18:51  * ljharb_joined
21:19:22  * ljharbquit (*.net *.split)
21:22:59  * ljharb_changed nick to ljharb
21:47:14  <thealphanerd>jbergstroem where will I find the branch?
21:47:22  <thealphanerd>I guess it is in CI
21:48:19  <jbergstroem>https://github.com/jbergstroem/node/tree/feature/testpy-tap13
22:14:41  * jenkins-monitorquit (Remote host closed the connection)
22:14:54  * jenkins-monitorjoined
22:50:38  <Trott>In the stress test, the win2008r2 and win2008r2-1p fail because they don't have the right VS Studio, I think. Should we take them out of the stress test? (Or leave them there for LTS stress tests or something?) Sorry if I've brought this up before. /cc joaocgreis
23:06:58  <joaocgreis>Trott: sorry for not doing it the other time, this is actually much easier when the commands are already developed :)I'm testing it now
23:15:23  <joaocgreis>Trott: done
23:15:33  <Trott>Cool, thanks!