On Mon, 03 Nov 2014, Malshan Peiris wrote:
Hi all,
I have juju-gui charm and other charm (A) deployed. Is it possible to do
following while running hook scripts of charm A:
1. Make configurations read only for charm A on juju-gui.
ex: We have a charm which should only allow configuration
I was working in the review queue last week on moving some precise charms
to trusty. For the trusty series we have the requirement for tests and the
Eco team worked hard to add tests to many precise charms. If you know of a
precise charm without tests, adding tests (that must pass) into trusty
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Whit Morriss
whit.morr...@canonical.com wrote:
Today I reviewed a bundle and a charm, both from our esteemed Chuck Butler.
The tez bundle sets up a framework for doing realtime high volume data
processing using Yarn and hadoop:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:16 PM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical
cur...@canonical.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Whit Morriss
whit.morr...@canonical.com wrote:
Today I reviewed a bundle and a charm, both from our esteemed Chuck
Butler.
The tez bundle sets up a framework for doing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2014-11-01 12:58 PM, John Meinel wrote:
I believe there is already opened-ports to tell you what ports
Juju is currently tracking.
Kapil says that's in 1.21 and I was using released juju, so I didn't
see that. Cool.
For stateful charms, I
On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Kapil Thangavelu
kapil.thangav...@canonical.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 12:58 PM, John Meinel j...@arbash-meinel.com wrote:
I believe there is already opened-ports to tell you what ports Juju is
currently tracking.
That's cool and news to me, it looks
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hey,
Sorry for not announcing the changes to open-port, close-port, and the
introduction of opened-ports. This was due to the discussions around
the networking model, i.e. things were changing rapidly and I wasn't
even sure it's worth announcing it
Reminding people of everything they should *not be doing *to get a feature
to be listed in the release notes is very ineffective.
What should they *be doing* instead, and why will the process work in the
future when it clearly has failed before, despite the assumed good
intention we should assume
