-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2013-10-29 16:38, Andreas Hasenack wrote:
Hi,
There is this charm with a db-admin relation to postgresql. In
this relation, the charm gets access to a super user in postgresql
and can do whatever it wants with it.
When the first unit of
https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/config-local.html
When we were creating this page we were talking on how we would prefer LXC
from the HWE stack while people are using Juju on 12.04.
However Scott Moser pointed out to me[1] that Juju works on the vanilla
12.04 stack and that we should consider what
Hi everyone,
We've been invited to join Ansible, Chef, Puppet, CFEngine, Rudder,
and SaltStack at the Config Management Camp: http://cfgmgmtcamp.eu/
This event takes place _after_ FOSDEM in Gent, Belgium. Not only are
we participating, but we've secured a track for us to discuss all
things Juju.
Do we want the cloud archive to contain non-lts packages? The packages
are being installed on machines that act as the client. Most users
running clients are not on lts.
We cannot trivially copy packages in a PPA to the Ubuntu cloud archive
pocket. We will change the release process to build into
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Jorge O. Castro jo...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
We've been invited to join Ansible, Chef, Puppet, CFEngine, Rudder,
and SaltStack at the Config Management Camp: http://cfgmgmtcamp.eu/
This event takes place _after_ FOSDEM in Gent, Belgium. Not only are
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 11:11 AM, John Arbash Meinel j...@arbash-meinel.com
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2013-10-29 16:38, Andreas Hasenack wrote:
Now I run add-unit, and another unit comes up. How can it get that
password?
...
Is this a case for a peer
Yes, Raring kernel or later.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:24 AM, Jorge O. Castro jo...@ubuntu.com wrote:
https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/config-local.html
When we were creating this page we were talking on how we would prefer LXC
from the HWE stack while people are using Juju on 12.04.
However
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
My patch uses runtime.GOMAXPROCS(runtime.NumCPU()) which means it
sets GOMAXPROCS=1 for machines that have 1 core.
I don't quite see what the problem is with this particular patch.
(taking advantage of multiple cores when they are available).
John
From my experience we will need to pay attention to the logical flow of the
application. Its not a simple case of enabling all CPUs. We will need to
run many tests repeatedly to ensure there are no races or potential
deadlocks. Unbuffered channels are a particular cause of deadlock.
That said,
There are many Fix Committed bugs in goose and gwacl. Since we don't
go regular releases of these libraries, their bugs remain open for a
long time.
Do we want to do regular releases? Do we consider their use in a
release stable juju-core to be Fix Released? Do we care about releases
at all since
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The conversation I remember from SFO was that in order to get armhf
builds on non-virtualized builders, we needed to a have a highly
restricted team which would build into a semi-private ppa and then
copy the binaries from there into the devel/stable
11 matches
Mail list logo