Unit state during charm upgrade

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 16:33, Gary Poster <gary.poster at canonical.com> wrote:
> That was the argument Francesco made, and why he suggested the status name
> change.

It would be relatively simple to present the fact a hook is executing
on a given unit, but at the same time it is expensive to be
centralizing all that information for every single unit and every
single hook in the system, just so one can tell if a given script was
run successfully or not. That's why I'm pondering about how to solve
the problem without introducing that overhead permanently.

-- 
Gustavo Niemeyer
http://niemeyer.net
http://niemeyer.net/plus
http://niemeyer.net/twitter
http://niemeyer.net/blog

-- I'm not absolutely sure of anything.