Best practices for "fat" charms

[Kapil Thangavelu]

fwiw. deployer/bundles have support for an explicit build phase for this
reason.. basically a build hook in charms is run prior to deploying. i'd
like to push it a bit further to deployer bundles as an archive format
 that can be completely self-contained for an app.


On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Jorge O. Castro <jorge at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Matt Bruzek and I have been doing some charm testing on a machine that
> does not have general access to the internet. So charms that pull from
> PPAs, github, etc. do not work.
>
> We've been able to "fatten" the charms by doing things like creating a
> /files directory in the charm itself and putting the
> package/tarball/jar file in there, and given the networking issues
> that we might face in production environments that we should start
> thinking about best practices for having charms with payloads instead
> of pulling from a network source.
>
> Marco has some ideas on how we can generalize this and he will respond
> to this thread.
>
> --
> Jorge Castro
> Canonical Ltd.
> http://juju.ubuntu.com/ - Automate your Cloud Infrastructure
>
> --
> Juju mailing list
> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20140401/536054e5/attachment.html>