Merge lp://staging/~niemeyer/pyjuju/charm-store into lp://staging/~juju/pyjuju/docs

Proposed by Gustavo Niemeyer
Status: Merged
Merged at revision: 3
Proposed branch: lp://staging/~niemeyer/pyjuju/charm-store
Merge into: lp://staging/~juju/pyjuju/docs
Diff against target: 470 lines (+466/-0)
1 file modified
source/internals/charm-store.rst (+466/-0)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://staging/~niemeyer/pyjuju/charm-store
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Juju Engineering Pending
Review via email: mp+89788@code.staging.launchpad.net

Description of the change

internals: added revised charm store specification

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Gustavo Niemeyer (niemeyer) wrote :

Please take a look.

Revision history for this message
Gustavo Niemeyer (niemeyer) wrote :

Reviewers: mp+89788_code.launchpad.net,

Message:
Please take a look.

Description:

https://code.launchpad.net/~niemeyer/juju/charm-store/+merge/89788

(do not edit description out of merge proposal)

Please review this at https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/

Affected files:
   A source/internals/charm-store.rst

Revision history for this message
William Reade (fwereade) wrote :

LGTM

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst
File source/internals/charm-store.rst (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode57
source/internals/charm-store.rst:57: must *not* be processed a second
time in case it was previously seen.
How about ", and if the given namespace was already seen it must *not*
be processed a second time"?

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode172
source/internals/charm-store.rst:172: the same convention. Whenever
deploying a local charm, juju should bump
should this be "updating" rather than "deploying"?

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode269
source/internals/charm-store.rst:269: revision received from the store,
stop and report it.
I don't think this is exactly right: see lp:917405. Probably this is not
the place to discuss this sort of implementation detail though.

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode294
source/internals/charm-store.rst:294: of the charm collection, a member
of the ``juju-composers`` team in
"charmers"?

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode295
source/internals/charm-store.rst:295: Launchpad must run the
``promogate`` command (currently in charm-tools)
I don't think "promogate" is a word. Should that be "promote", or
"promulgate", or am I missing a reference?

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/

Revision history for this message
Gustavo Niemeyer (niemeyer) wrote :

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst
File source/internals/charm-store.rst (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode57
source/internals/charm-store.rst:57: must *not* be processed a second
time in case it was previously seen.
On 2012/01/24 13:59:25, fwereade wrote:
> How about ", and if the given namespace was already seen it must *not*
be
> processed a second time"?

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode172
source/internals/charm-store.rst:172: the same convention. Whenever
deploying a local charm, juju should bump
On 2012/01/24 13:59:25, fwereade wrote:
> should this be "updating" rather than "deploying"?

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode269
source/internals/charm-store.rst:269: revision received from the store,
stop and report it.
On 2012/01/24 13:59:25, fwereade wrote:
> I don't think this is exactly right: see lp:917405. Probably this is
not the
> place to discuss this sort of implementation detail though.

The procedure here looks very straightforward, so I'm not sure what
you're referring to exactly. If the charm is running the current or a
more recent release, we shouldn't upgrade. If this isn't working well
for whatever reason, it's a bug elsewhere that we have to fix.

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode294
source/internals/charm-store.rst:294: of the charm collection, a member
of the ``juju-composers`` team in
On 2012/01/24 13:59:25, fwereade wrote:
> "charmers"?

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/diff/1/source/internals/charm-store.rst#newcode295
source/internals/charm-store.rst:295: Launchpad must run the
``promogate`` command (currently in charm-tools)
On 2012/01/24 13:59:25, fwereade wrote:
> I don't think "promogate" is a word. Should that be "promote", or
"promulgate",
> or am I missing a reference?

Oops, you're right. Thanks.

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047/

Revision history for this message
Gustavo Niemeyer (niemeyer) wrote :

*** Submitted:

internals: added revised charm store specification

https://codereview.appspot.com/5570047

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