On 12 March 2015 at 07:22, Andrew Wilkins andrew.wilk...@canonical.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Tim Penhey tim.pen...@canonical.com
wrote:
On 12/03/15 18:13, Ian Booth wrote:
I see the point. But it could be considered analogous to having lots of
methods
called New() etc.
On 12/03/15 05:01, David Cheney wrote:
lucky(~/src/github.com/juju/juju) % pt -i type\ State\ | wc -l
23
Thank you.
When I was new to Juju the fact that we had a central State, core to
the Juju model, but we had umpteen types called State - so where you saw
a State you had no idea what
Perhaps a better solution would have been a better name for the core State.
Michael
+
1
Also matches my sprint topic about an improved management of our
persistency (separation of model types and interfaces for their
persistency; grouped by domains; instantiated by factories to allow
When I was new to juju myself, we only had one State, I believe. That
one golden state was supposed to represent the state of the whole
deployment, so it was indeed The State of the system. Having tons of
these indeed sounds awkward.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Michael Foord
On 12 March 2015 at 14:23, Gustavo Niemeyer gust...@niemeyer.net wrote:
The core state (The State) is the one case where it doesn't matter,
IMO. Everybody knows what it is. It's the other dozen that create the
issue, and they will remain as ambiguous if you just rename the one
State.
The
On 12/03/15 18:13, Ian Booth wrote:
I see the point. But it could be considered analogous to having lots of
methods
called New() etc. So long as the types are relevant for the package in which
they're declared then isn't that ok? If we have lots of packages where state
needs to be persisted,
On 12/03/15 16:53, Tim Penhey wrote:
On 12/03/15 18:13, Ian Booth wrote:
I see the point. But it could be considered analogous to having lots of
methods
called New() etc. So long as the types are relevant for the package in which
they're declared then isn't that ok? If we have lots of
I see the point. But it could be considered analogous to having lots of methods
called New() etc. So long as the types are relevant for the package in which
they're declared then isn't that ok? If we have lots of packages where state
needs to be persisted, how is that different to having lots of
