There are a slew of opportunities for Actions to step in here, and I've got
a few use cases listed below:
- HDFS file system operations in Big-Data scenarios
- dump/warm cache on proxy services like Varnish
- Ingest data-sources with any database (ex: load twitter hash-tag data
into
On 10 September 2014 11:23, Tim Penhey tim.pen...@canonical.com wrote:
On 10/09/14 06:59, John Weldon wrote:
We're looking for use cases for Juju Actions, mostly to make sure we
expose the right API.
I'm hoping for a few different use cases from the Juju Web UI folks, but
I'd appreciate
Thanks for the clarification, I misunderstood what the code was doing. I'm
glad to hear this code won't be needed for much longer, but I think we
should backport your explicit check so that non-english users can use Juju.
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Andrew Wilkins
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Nate Finch nate.fi...@canonical.com
wrote:
Thanks for the clarification, I misunderstood what the code was doing.
I'm glad to hear this code won't be needed for much longer, but I think we
should backport your explicit check so that non-english users can use
On Tue, 09 Sep 2014, John Weldon wrote:
Hi;
We're looking for use cases for Juju Actions, mostly to make sure we expose
the right API.
I'm hoping for a few different use cases from the Juju Web UI folks, but
I'd appreciate input from anyone wanting to use Juju Actions in their
charms too.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-09-10 02:56 AM, Charles Butler wrote:
o as an interesting aside, we are kind of brute forcing this with
config... which it really appears that an action would be better
suited to this task for things like, say, CI
We would never use
On 10 September 2014 19:49, Richard Harding rick.hard...@canonical.com wrote:
I think most of the use cases presented so far line up with ours. One I
want to call out as interesting and I hadn't thought about is killing a
long running action in progress. The example of a database backup. I
On Wed, 10 Sep 2014, Stuart Bishop wrote:
On 10 September 2014 19:49, Richard Harding rick.hard...@canonical.com
wrote:
I think most of the use cases presented so far line up with ours. One I
want to call out as interesting and I hadn't thought about is killing a
long running action in
There's nothing that says the hook cannot call config to make it
reproduce-able - but it also doesn't necessarily have to be forced through
config either - these were pointed out as seed ideas i've heard and
germinated in terms of uses for actions. But point acknowledge that it
wouldn't work for
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Jeff Pihach jeff.pih...@canonical.com
wrote:
The interesting part of these interactions vs the ones I've seen mentioned
is that they are client side actions. They would open a new tab or the
browser to display the page in question vs simply executing some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-09-10 01:29 PM, Charles Butler wrote:
There's nothing that says the hook cannot call config to make it
reproduce-able
But if it's a config variable, then config-changed needs to be able to
handle changes to it. If config-changed can handle
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:59 AM, John Weldon johnweld...@gmail.com wrote:
If you have any interest or investment in using or publishing Actions for
Juju please review and contribute!
I'm very thankful for all the discussion so far.
I'll try to capture all of the suggestions here in the
How much do we care about charm development on Windows (both windows charms
and development on windows machines)?
The reason I ask is that Horacio is starting on the charm-sync task from
the pain points spreadsheet (syncing the charm files local - unit during
charm development debugging).
Thanks Eric! I've used Reviewboard at a previous job and I'm fairly sure
that it aligns better with the way the Juju Core team likes to work than
Github's review features.
Two questions:
1. Is this what we're supposed to be doing from right now?
2. I'm pretty sure some configuration of the rbt
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Menno Smits menno.sm...@canonical.com wrote:
Thanks Eric! I've used Reviewboard at a previous job and I'm fairly sure
that it aligns better with the way the Juju Core team likes to work than
Github's review features.
Two questions:
1. Is this what we're
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Aaron Bentley
aaron.bent...@canonical.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-09-10 01:29 PM, Charles Butler wrote:
There's nothing that says the hook cannot call config to make it
reproduce-able
But if it's a config variable, then
http://reviews.vapour.ws/
Check your email for eric's step by step directions. It's not hard.
Existing pull requests should be finished up on github, but from now on,
all new pull requests should have reviews done on reviewboard.
-Nate Tim Ian
--
Juju-dev mailing list
Easy Tiger. Let's check that it's all properly set up first.
EDIT: As I was typing this, just saw Eric's email.
Let's get everything nailed down and aim for Monday next week.
On 11/09/14 12:21, Nate Finch wrote:
http://reviews.vapour.ws/
Check your email for eric's step by step directions.
Hi folks,
Those of you who are reviewers should now have invites to your bi-weekly
review time. This now occurs on the same day every two weeks.
I have tried to have the mentors on the day after the mentees (or
overlapping). Also tried to spread out the different timezones. It
will never be
Hi folks,
I'd like to bring a small, recent addition to everyone's attention:
https://github.com/juju/juju/blob/master/api/base/testing/patch.go
PatchFacadeCaller can be used (and is used now in several places) to avoid
calling through to a real API server in api tests. Ideally we'd just
...
I have thought for a while that, rather than writing more error-prone code
(at 17k LOC, surely the API code is big enough as it is?), it would
be good to create a tool that helps us with the underlying problem -
incompatible changes made to marshaled types.
This would not be too hard
21 matches
Mail list logo
