Hi @guidotripaldi, thanks for the PR! This looks great, and the documentation is fantastic!

This branch is now behind master and needs to be rebased in order to benefit from some testing pipeline improvements we've recently made. I'm happy to do so but this would require force-pushing to your branch, something you might not be expecting and that may cause a conflict for you.

After rebasing, the two missing pieces I see are

• Documentation (not the moduledocs, which look great, but a separate docs section on hot upgrades)
• Functional tests

I'm happy to work on either or both of the above and help get this across the line. Thanks again!

Hello @rjanja , thank you!
I have rebased the hot_upgrade branch and forced a push to origin, now there should be no more conflicts.
I've added also the mkdocs documentation, please let me know if it fits well, or if you prefer a different style/structure.

Looks great @guidotripaldi ! Thanks for all your work on this. I'll spend some time with it over the weekend.

I apologize it's taking me longer to review this than I expected. I'll be pushing up some documentation changes soon but still need to work out the functional tests. On the bright side, I've been able to use this to do some hot upgrades of a really simple app :)

no problem, take your time

Hey guys,

Just don't want review of this amazing feature to fold over the Christmas ;)

Hi @rjanja, @guidotripaldi

Would you please add a bit more gas to get this through review process?

Thanks.

Hello @rjanja, is there something I can do to help you in the review process for this long pending PR?

Hi @rjanja, @guidotripaldi

Would you please add a bit more gas to get this through review process?

Thanks.

@guidotripaldi Thanks for taking the time to pull this together, and for sticking with it for all these months. We'd like to incorporate these changes but there are still two outstanding issues:

• Conflicts with the master branch the must be resolved (please use a rebase) prior to merging.
• The new functionality needs unit and integration tests.

The tests are the bigger hurdle, as the conflicts look trivial. Unfortunately we do not have the time right now to add the missing test coverage in-house, but we do have the time to support someone else adding it. Examples on how to test tasks can be found here (both unit and functional tests): https://github.com/labzero/bootleg/tree/master/test/bootleg/tasks. Our goal is 100% coverage for these sorts of changes, as reported by coveralls.

hey @guidotripaldi - let me know if you would like to pair on that

hey @guidotripaldi - let me know if you would like to pair on that

Hello lessless, Thank you for being available. Unfortunately I have no time at the moment to learn how to develop the required unit and integration tests, so it would be wonderful if you can take over this job

Same thing here. I would love to use hot upgrades in bootleg but don't have time to figure out what exactly should be done here.

@holetse I guess your situation didn't change as well, isn't it?

@holetse @rjanja can you guys please help to define expectations and I'll try to find some time to get this merged in.