[Review Queue] gpfs, xCAT, ubuntu-repository-cache, charm-tools
adam.israel at canonical.com
Thu Jul 30 22:06:22 UTC 2015
The instructions provided in the README don’t match with the binary
provided to us for testing, and the documentation is too vague about
what needs to be done in order to provide the binary to the charm during
installation. I’ve recommended an update to the README and/or the binary.
Currently, the user is asked to install and configure apache to host a
private ubuntu repository on machine 0, to be used by the charm. Binary
distribution is an issue still being discussed. I’m satisfied with this
as an interim step, so long as the instructions to do so are clear and
I’ve opened a wishlist <https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1479963> bug
against ubuntu-repository-cache, which I think could be modified with
the upcoming composer tools in charm-helpers, so that it could also be
used to host private repositories. This would greatly simplify the
process for charms that require proprietary binaries.
There are several policy issues, most notably idempotent and a lack of
unit tests, that still need to be resolved. I’ve offered some examples
of how a charm requiring specific configuration values set in order to
install may work idempotently. Other minor issues include removing
unused hook-related files and a typo in the metadata.
Fixes critical bug preventing the charm from being deployed. +1, merged.
A very brief look at the new composer functionality coming to
charm-tools (and one I’m excited about, especially how it could solve
the use case provided by the /gpfs/ charm. There needs to be some docs
provided for charm authors so they can decide if composer is right for
them and, if so, how to implement it.
Adam Israel - Software Engineer
http://juju.ubuntu.com/ - Automate your Cloud Infrastructure
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Juju