OMG, I went way deep down the rabbit hole.
I had to find charms.reactive.join() to find what the difference of the
scopes really means.
This kept me busy and questioning my sanity for two days:
$ git diff
diff --git a/peers.py b/peers.py
index 976c0ad..93cda29 100644
--- a/peers.py
+++ b/peers.py
Hi Tilman
That's very useful. Based on your work I'm definitely going to explore the
interactions of all of these scopes!
Cheers
Alex.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Tilman Baumann <
tilman.baum...@canonical.com> wrote:
> OMG, I went way deep down the rabbit hole.
>
> I had to find charms.r
Circling back around to this. Do we have an ETA or any updates on the
progress of interfaces.juju.solutions being folded into jujucharms.com?
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016, 11:20 AM Marco Ceppi
wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> We're aware of the outage and working to bring the service back online.
> This is un
Hi Juju!
Cory, Kostas, Pete, and myself ran through the queue yesterday. We have
lots of great +1 / promulgation to announce! Here's the rundown:
Jan 26, 2017: Cory, Kevin, Kostas, Pete
-
IBM-platform-lsf-server
-
https://review.jujucharms.com/reviews/18
-
Tests
A default SG rule generated for every model allows 22 from 0.0.0.0/0, I'm
guessing this is because we are trying to facilitate the use case for juju
deployed on a public cloud, and instances being ssh accessed from the
internet and not from behind VPN in the same address space.
A functionality whi
I am having similar questions / requests from other users, so +1 from me
(actually +3). Plus I like the sshallownes of ssh-allow.
Another request I have heard is get the ability to associate an IAM role
attached to the instances. Currently Juju doesn't attach any role to the
instances, which means
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Samuel Cozannet <
samuel.cozan...@canonical.com> wrote:
> I am having similar questions / requests from other users, so +1 from me
> (actually +3). Plus I like the sshallownes of ssh-allow.
>
> Another request I have heard is get the ability to associate an IAM rol
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Merlijn Sebrechts
wrote:
> Hi all
>
>
> The testing docs need some love. The whole Charm testing ecosystem is very
> complex. The docs should focus on guiding users to a best-practice workflow.
> There is just too much choice to let the user figure it out himself.
>
> I'll have a draft ready by the Charmer Summit that I will send to the
> list here and invite you and any others interested in charm/bundle
> testing. Perhaps if folks are able to attend the summit in person we
> can discuss further face-to-face.
>
Count me in for the discussion. I added the se
