Hi,
I get this when trying to bootstrap:
WARNING failed to find 1.20.6 tools, will attempt to use 1.20.5
Launching instance
WARNING picked arbitrary tools &{1.20.5-trusty-amd64
https://juju-dist.s3.amazonaws.com/rc-testing/tools/releases/juju-1.20.5-trusty-amd64.tgz
052df415c790904cd93204ef1841e4
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 10:48 PM, Free Ekanayaka <
free.ekanay...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I get this when trying to bootstrap:
>
> WARNING failed to find 1.20.6 tools, will attempt to use 1.20.5
> Launching instance
> WARNING picked arbitrary tools &{1.2
Cross-posting here as well from juju-dev, since this might be more broadly
helpful to the community.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Free Ekanayaka
Date: 11 October 2016 at 10:57
Subject: New helper library for unit-testing charms
To: "juju-...@lists.ubuntu.com"
On 20 October 2016 at 16:09, Rye Terrell wrote:
> > Subordinate charms only make sense when collocated. And I would argue that
> subordinates are extremely common, at least in production environments.
>
> > In this context clean up is very important because it's not unusual for
> > operators
> t
On 20 October 2016 at 23:16, Rye Terrell wrote:
> > Do you have a real world example at hand?
>
> No, why?
>
Easier to reason around a specific concrete case than talk about
theoretical situations. After looking at a few concrete situations we can
come up with a more realistic understanding of t
On 1 December 2016 at 13:53, Marco Ceppi wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:00 AM Adam Collard
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 1 Dec 2016 at 04:02 Nate Finch wrote:
>>
>> On IRC, someone was lamenting the fact that the Ubuntu charm takes longer
>> to deploy now, because it has been updated to exercise mor
On 1 December 2016 at 14:39, Marco Ceppi wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:28 AM Free Ekanayaka <
> free.ekanay...@canonical.com> wrote:
>
>> On 1 December 2016 at 13:53, Marco Ceppi
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:00 AM Adam Collard
>>
On 2 December 2016 at 06:27, Stuart Bishop
wrote:
> We might be able to lower deployment times from minutes to seconds, since
> often this step is the main time sink.
>
Right. These are the time scales I meant too as well. If you want to have
quality software you need to be able to test it. If
On 15 December 2016 at 07:59, John Meinel wrote:
> Right, the issue for test/development iterations is that "machine
> requested to booted in cloud" for LXD is a lot closer to 10s. Especially if
> you set "enable-os-refresh-update: false" and "enable-os-upgrade: false",
> which are also likely to
>
> As a developer, with an xfs-backed
>
s/xfs/zfs/
--
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
10 matches
Mail list logo
