Re: Follow up - "Missing contrib.amulet in charm-helpers-hooks"

James, Some responses in line: On 10/26/2015 11:38 PM, James Beedy wrote: As a follow up to my earlier post "Missing contrib.amulet in charm-helpers-hooks” I want to clarify a few things, as well as hopefully get to the bottom of some hook errors I am experiencing. Earlier, I mentioned that I

Re: charm license requirements with multi-licensed payloads

That is right. When you do a patch and include it inside a charm, what you are doing is a contribution to the pre-existing code, hence inheriting the license from another charm. If it doesn't have a license and it's been released, I would assume a public domain license until a license is specified

Re: [charms.reactive] http relation.available gets called on upgrade-charm hook, gives error.

Merlijn, Be aware that I had to make some small changes to the interface since my previous email. In particular, I had to remove the "changed" state, as it does not function in any way like it was intended. I updated the example in the README to achieve the same end result, however. I agree tha

Re: charm license requirements with multi-licensed payloads

Thanks, José! I was curious about this too. A follow-up on this question: I have a Charm repo that includes Charms from different sources with patches. Some of these Charms are licensed differently, some require copyleft and some don't. Now, I do it thi

Re: [charms.reactive] http relation.available gets called on upgrade-charm hook, gives error.

Hi Cory Thanks for this! I'll try this out as soon as I get the time. I completely agree that the HA proxy block config should be in a seperate interface protocol. I would even go as far as to say that a block of application-specific config should not be passed between services. The way the apac

Re: How to make Juju High Availability work properly?

Hi Leon, I was able to recreate the "lost" agent in a simple environment and have opened up a bug for it: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1510651 Since my environment was pretty simple, I didn't run into any hook errors. Could you attach the unit logs from some of the services with err

Re: charm license requirements with multi-licensed payloads

Hey Kevin, When you write a charm and include a copyright file, what you are licensing are the lines of code that you write in the charm, not the software itself. You may choose any license you want. If you want to specify the license each piece of software uses, you can do so in the README file,

Re: [charms.reactive] http relation.available gets called on upgrade-charm hook, gives error.

Merlijn, Unfortunately, the correct solution for the issue with the HTTP interface layer is to change how the requires side works a bit. I went ahead and made those changes and moved the repo (with Ben's permission) to https://github.com/juju-solutions/interface-http (which will also allow easier

charm license requirements with multi-licensed payloads

Hi folks, Our big data charms (apache licensed) deploy Hadoop (apache licensed). Hadoop supports various compression codecs, with one of the more popular being lzo. lzo is GPLv2 licensed and therefore not distributed with Hadoop. As a charm author, what is my licensing obligation if I want my ch

Fwd: [charms.reactive] http relation.available gets called on upgrade-charm hook, gives error.

Hi Cory Thanks for the explanation. Is there a way to override the scope of the http relation without forking the interface? Kind regards Merlijn 2015-10-26 18:21 GMT+01:00 Cory Johns : > Merlijn, > > You'll note that the docs for auto_accessors >