Ubuntu CI Services

Merge lp://staging/~doanac/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/restish-swift into lp://staging/ubuntu-ci-services-itself

  1. restish-swift
  2. Merge into trunk
Proposed by Andy Doan
Status: Merged
Approved by: Andy Doan
Approved revision: 248
Merged at revision: 245
Proposed branch: lp://staging/~doanac/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/restish-swift
Merge into: lp://staging/ubuntu-ci-services-itself
Diff against target: 143 lines (+52/-12)
6 files modified
charms/precise/restish/config.yaml (+7/-0)
charms/precise/restish/hooks/hooks.py (+33/-8)
juju-deployer/branch-source-builder.yaml.tmpl (+3/-1)
juju-deployer/image-builder.yaml.tmpl (+3/-1)
juju-deployer/lander.yaml.tmpl (+3/-1)
juju-deployer/test-runner.yaml.tmpl (+3/-1)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://staging/~doanac/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/restish-swift
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Evan (community) Approve
PS Jenkins bot (community) continuous-integration Needs Fixing
Review via email: mp+207068@code.staging.launchpad.net

Commit message

convert restish charms and services to support swift payloads

Description of the change

this is a more simplified version of:

 https://code.launchpad.net/~ev/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/restish-swift-deployment/+merge/203385

that might be easier for people to review and +1.

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
PS Jenkins bot (ps-jenkins) wrote :

FAILED: Continuous integration, rev:248
http://s-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/uci-engine-ci/174/
Executed test runs:

Click here to trigger a rebuild:
http://s-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/uci-engine-ci/174/rebuild

review: Needs Fixing (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
Evan (ev) wrote :

Looks good, though in the future we probably want to factor this out into a library that gets pulled into the charm at build time (like charmhelpers). Or just get it merged into charmhelpers :)

+1

review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Andy Doan (doanac) wrote :

On 02/19/2014 02:54 AM, Evan Dandrea wrote:
> Looks good, though in the future we probably want to factor this out into a library that gets pulled into the charm at build time (like charmhelpers). Or just get it merged into charmhelpers

Yep. I think it would be nice to refactor our local "charmhelper" type
code out of our charms and start using the actual library properly.

Revision history for this message
Evan (ev) wrote :

On 19 February 2014 16:21, Andy Doan <email address hidden> wrote:
> Yep. I think it would be nice to refactor our local "charmhelper" type
> code out of our charms and start using the actual library properly.

Whoop!

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches