First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

[William Reade]

On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer <
gustavo.niemeyer at canonical.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:41 PM, William Reade
> <william.reade at canonical.com> wrote:
> > (out of interest, if started/stopped state were communicated to you any
> > other way, would you still need these?)
>
> If you communicate events in a different way, you obviously won't need
> your previous way of communicating events.
>

Sure -- but it's perhaps telling that (AFAIR) *all* the other state we
expose via hook execution *is* accessible from any other hook via a hook
tool. Was there a specific rationale for treating that particular bool
differently? It seems that if we exposed that state, we'd have at least one
more config-changed hook that acted as it's meant to ;p.

Cheers
William


>
> gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/attachments/20140819/ab9465c8/attachment.html>