Does juju support 'named' interfaces?

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Sidnei da Silva
<sidnei.da.silva at canonical.com> wrote:
> I can see someone working around this by forking the pgsql charm as
> 'pgsql-shard[0-N]' and each of those charms only providing the
> specific interface, and having the app require 'pgsql-shard[0-N]'
> instead of a generic 'pgsql' charm, but clearly this would cause an
> unnecessary interface explosion.

Yeah, this sounds bad.

Have you thought about having the shard name as a configuration
property instead, so you have a single interface that provides the
shard name? That should be straightforward.


gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net