On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer
wrote:
> I don't think I fully understand the proposal there. To have such a
> "something-changed" hook, we ought to have a better mechanism to tell
> *what* actually changed. In other words, we have a number of hooks
> that imply a state transiti
For our work on Machine View in the Juju GUI the team needs to help the
user know what can and cannot be done with machines and containers. One of
those things is determining if lxc or kvm containers work on various
providers so the UX will not show users an option we know doesn't work.
Jay wrote
On Tue, 19 Aug 2014, Richard Harding wrote:
> Right now I'm hesitant to enable creating containers in Machine View for
> anything but MAAS.
Just to clarify, after having some more coffee we can warn users that
expose services that have units in containers in the GUI and it should help
raise warni
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Menno Smits wrote:
> Be aware that I've seen JFDI used at least a couple of times over recent
> weeks on PRs that *were* related to fixing a CI blocker but the person was
> in too much of a hurry to add the appropriate __fixes-N__ comment. That
> accounts for a
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 9:07 AM, William Reade
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think I fully understand the proposal there. To have such a
>> "something-changed" hook, we ought to have a better mechanism to tell
>> *what* actually changed. In othe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-08-19 09:42 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> I have never seen myself a single charm that completely ignores
> all the action cues to simply re-read the whole state from the
> ground up,
The cs:~juju-qa/precise/juju-reports charm follows this gener
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Aaron Bentley
wrote:
> On 14-08-19 09:42 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
>> I have never seen myself a single charm that completely ignores
>> all the action cues to simply re-read the whole state from the
>> ground up,
>
> The cs:~juju-qa/precise/juju-reports charm f
"expose" is different because it is about making the service available
outside of the cloud. The issue with route able containers is that they
aren't route able even within the cloud.
At this point only MaaS has route able containers.
John
=:->
On Aug 19, 2014 4:56 PM, "Richard Harding"
wrote:
>
Thanks for the correction. You're right, in the testing we were checking
expose directly. We also did a test (not in this script) around two
services where one was on the root and one was in a container, but even
that's not a fair case of 'routable' as that might work while two units on
different m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-08-19 10:36 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Aaron Bentley
> wrote:
>> On 14-08-19 09:42 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
>>> I have never seen myself a single charm that completely
>>> ignores all the action cues to s
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Aaron Bentley
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 14-08-19 09:42 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> > I have never seen myself a single charm that completely ignores
> > all the action cues to simply re-read the whole state from the
> > grou
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Aaron Bentley
wrote:
>
> True, I didn't call out the exceptions for the charmworld charm. For
> completeness, the exceptions in charmworld are:
> install
> nrpe-external-master-relation-changed
> restart
>
(this isn't actually a hook?)
> reverseproxy-relation-j
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Aaron Bentley
wrote:
>> This is actually your website-relation-changed hook:
>>
>> http://paste.ubuntu.com/8089398/
>
> No, it's not:
> http://manage.jujucharms.com/~juju-qa/precise/juju-reports/hooks/website-relation-changed
Sorry, I was looking at your own vers
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:41 PM, William Reade
wrote:
> (out of interest, if started/stopped state were communicated to you any
> other way, would you still need these?)
If you communicate events in a different way, you obviously won't need
your previous way of communicating events.
gustavo @
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-08-19 11:41 AM, William Reade wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Aaron Bentley
> mailto:aaron.bent...@canonical.com>>
> wrote:
>
> reverseproxy-relation-joined start stop
>
>
> (out of interest, if started/stopped state were communicat
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer <
gustavo.nieme...@canonical.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:41 PM, William Reade
> wrote:
> > (out of interest, if started/stopped state were communicated to you any
> > other way, would you still need these?)
>
> If you communicate even
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-08-19 11:41 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Aaron Bentley
> wrote:
> At the same time, the strictness of redoing everything all the time
> is not necessary, and a good example is still that
> website-relation-c
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Aaron Bentley
wrote:
> True. At that point, the pattern is not a win, but it's not much of a
> loss. Changing the web site relation is extremely uncommon, but
> operations which do require server restarts are quite common. So
> making an exception for the web si
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-08-19 12:46 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Aaron Bentley
> wrote:
>> True. At that point, the pattern is not a win, but it's not much
>> of a loss. Changing the web site relation is extremely uncommon,
>> but
Something to be mindful of is that we will shortly be implementing a new
hook for metering (likely called collect-metrics). This hook differs
slightly to the others in that it will be called periodically (e.g. once
every hour) with the intention of sending metrics for that unit to the
state server.
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Matthew Williams
wrote:
> Something to be mindful of is that we will shortly be implementing a new
> hook for metering (likely called collect-metrics). This hook differs
> slightly to the others in that it will be called periodically (e.g. once
> every hour) with t
hmm.. there's three distinct threads here.
default-hook -> charms that do so symlink 0-100% -> to one hook.. in
practice everything, sometimes minus install (as the hook infrastructure
needs pkgs).. and most typically implemented via dispatch table.
something-changed -> completely orthogonal to e
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Aaron Bentley
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> On 14-08-19 12:46 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Aaron Bentley
>> wrote:
>>> True. At that point, the pattern is not a win, but it's not much
>>> of a
So you're always welcome to do more testing :), but I'm sure that right now
LXC containers only get host-local IP addresses, and are not bridged to the
outside network anywhere but on MaaS.
John
=:->
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Richard Harding wrote:
> Thanks for the correction. You're ri
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 12:29 AM, Kapil Thangavelu <
kapil.thangav...@canonical.com> wrote:
> hmm.. there's three distinct threads here.
>
> default-hook -> charms that do so symlink 0-100% -> to one hook.. in
> practice everything, sometimes minus install (as the hook infrastructure
> needs pkgs)
25 matches
Mail list logo
