Does juju support 'named' interfaces?
gustavo.niemeyer at canonical.com
Tue Jun 26 05:06:30 UTC 2012
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Sidnei da Silva
<sidnei.da.silva at canonical.com> wrote:
> One thing that's not clear is if the service name is exposed in a way
> that it can be used like that.
The service *name* shouldn't be used in the charm implementation. The
user should be free to name his service whatever he pleases and the
service itself should continue to work. Relations exist to define
that kind of.. well, relationship.
gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net
More information about the Juju