On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 5:04 AM, Nate Finch <nate.fi...@canonical.com> wrote: > given that we currently use the path, you can't have one charm for multiple > series anyway.
For deploying local: charms, symlinks work fine here. > This would at least be better than what we have right now, > and would be backwards compatible (older jujus would just require the old > style local deploy and would ignore the extra series specification in the > metadata). > > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical > <cur...@canonical.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:26 AM, John Meinel <j...@arbash-meinel.com> >> wrote: >> ... >> > At the very least we need to know what OS Series the charm is targeting. >> > Which is currently only inferred from the path. I don't particularly >> > like >> > it, and I think the code that searches your whole repository and then >> > picks >> > the "best" one is bad, as it confuses people far more often than it is >> > helpful. >> > (If you have $REPO, and have $REPO/precise/charm and >> > $REPO/precise/charm-backup but the 'revision' number in charm-backup is >> > higher for whatever reason, juju deploy --repository=$REPO charm will >> > actually deploy charm-backup) >> >> I thought we agreed in Burlington that the charm can declare the >> series in the metadata.yaml >> series: trusty >> >> A list of series was rejected I recall. There was a plan to change >> charm store ingestion to read the metadata.yaml. Maybe this fell apart >> because without support for a list of series/oses, you cannot have one >> charm supporting more than one series. >> >> -- >> Curtis Hovey >> Canonical Cloud Development and Operations >> http://launchpad.net/~sinzui > > > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
