I made the comparison yesterday of interfaces.juju.solutions performing a similar role to maven central and providing artifact versions to releases that ask for that release.
On 4 Nov 2016 08:12, "Konstantinos Tsakalozos" <kos.tsakalo...@canonical.com> wrote: > Indeed, layer and interface versioning should please some release > managers. > > Thanks, > Konstantinos > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Ryan Beisner <ryan.beis...@canonical.com> > wrote: > >> As far as I know, there is no notion of a stable Layer or a stable >> Interface. That makes it difficult to carry any layered charm as "stable," >> and quite awkward to cherry-pick and backport fixes to stable charms which >> depend on Layers and Interfaces. >> >> As you mention, you could synthesize stability (or point-in-time) by >> branching, forking repos, but I think Layers and Interfaces should >> ultimately grow proper versioning semantics. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Ryan >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:31 AM, Konstantinos Tsakalozos < >> kos.tsakalo...@canonical.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> This is probably a question on best practises. >>> >>> A reasonable ask for a build process is to be able to reproduce the same >>> output artifacts from a certain point in time. For example, I would like to >>> be able to rebuild the same charm I build 10 minutes, or a week or a month >>> ago. I can think of a way to do that but it involves forking the layers >>> used and getting them locally before charm build. Is there a better way? >>> What would you do to accommodate this requirement? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Konstantinos >>> >>> -- >>> Juju mailing list >>> Juju@lists.ubuntu.com >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailm >>> an/listinfo/juju >>> >>> >> > > -- > Juju mailing list > Juju@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/ > mailman/listinfo/juju > >
-- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
