What would you like to see in the virtual Charm School hangouts?

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Kapil Thangavelu
<kapil.thangavelu at canonical.com> wrote:
>> I don't see a reason to do that either. If you want something
>> "pre-deployed" within the charm, simply put that thing within the
>> charm.
>>
>
> Because charms are code and its painful to version binaries and large files

There's no such restriction about having only code inside charms, and
this isn't the case today already. It's also trivial to have binary
files within VCS (I do that in multiple cases) and anywhere else if
you don't want to put them in the charm.

> in vcs. Again this is a current paradigm based on working with the tool,

Exactly. As you said, that's what IS does today, which means it's
already possible, and in fact I believe it is also trivial. I don't
see a compelling reason to make the core model of building or
deploying charms any more complex than it already is.


gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net