Merge lp://staging/~gary/charms/precise/juju-gui/bug1117896 into lp://staging/~juju-gui/charms/precise/juju-gui/trunk
Status: | Merged | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Merged at revision: | 34 | ||||
Proposed branch: | lp://staging/~gary/charms/precise/juju-gui/bug1117896 | ||||
Merge into: | lp://staging/~juju-gui/charms/precise/juju-gui/trunk | ||||
Diff against target: |
266 lines (+63/-11) 8 files modified
config.yaml (+6/-0) config/config.js.template (+1/-1) config/haproxy.cfg.template (+1/-1) hooks/config-changed (+6/-2) hooks/install (+5/-3) hooks/start (+1/-1) hooks/utils.py (+42/-2) revision (+1/-1) |
||||
To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp://staging/~gary/charms/precise/juju-gui/bug1117896 | ||||
Related bugs: |
|
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
Juju GUI Hackers | Pending | ||
Review via email:
|
Commit message
fix charmhelpers incompatibility; add an "insecure" mode for the charm to support CI; reduce the time to start the charm with the gui release by about 2.5 minutes
Description of the change
This is work from bcsaller and hatch that I joined in on at the end to fix bug 1117896 as well.
Their code adds an "insecure" mode for the charm that we need to run the charm in CI against IE, which doesn't like our self-signed cert.
It also fixes the charmhelpers incompatibility.
My code makes getting the stage and build dependencies dependent on whether we need them. In my one test, getting the stage dependencies took 30 seconds on ec2, and getting the build dependencies (pre-make) took 110 seconds, so by not getting these dependencies we shave another 2 minutes and 20 seconds from the default installation. (For comparison, getting the tarball saves about 6 minutes against doing a full build, looking at the makefile alone.)
I'll make these changes, but these are pertinent to the work by bcsaller and hatch. :-)
In config.yaml, I plan to change "Do not set this property unless you are clear of the risks." to "This should never be used for production, and is only present to ease testing."
Per hatch's comment, I'll remove the print statements.
I want to add a comment about how that INSECURE comment is working in the haproxy config.