Juju Charms Collection
ubuntu-ci-services-itself package

Merge lp://qastaging/~doanac/charms/precise/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/rabbitmq-worker-conf into lp://qastaging/~canonical-ci-engineering/charms/precise/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/rabbitmq-worker

  1. Precise Pangolin (12.04)
  2. rabbitmq-worker-conf
  3. Merge into rabbitmq-worker
Proposed by Andy Doan
Status: Merged
Merged at revision: 11
Proposed branch: lp://qastaging/~doanac/charms/precise/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/rabbitmq-worker-conf
Merge into: lp://qastaging/~canonical-ci-engineering/charms/precise/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/rabbitmq-worker
Diff against target: 40 lines (+13/-0)
2 files modified
config.yaml (+7/-0)
hooks/hooks.py (+6/-0)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://qastaging/~doanac/charms/precise/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/rabbitmq-worker-conf
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Paul Larson Approve
Francis Ginther Pending
Canonical CI Engineering Pending
Review via email: mp+203266@code.qastaging.launchpad.net

Description of the change

This adds the ability to specify a config file that the charm will store under the root of the unit's source directory

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Andy Doan (doanac) wrote :

I played with this by deploying the branch-source-builder from our trunk with a small change like:

=== modified file 'juju-deployer/branch-source-builder.yaml'
--- juju-deployer/branch-source-builder.yaml 2013-12-19 17:11:55 +0000
+++ juju-deployer/branch-source-builder.yaml 2014-01-26 21:46:10 +0000
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
             options:
                 branch: lp:ubuntu-ci-services-itself
                 main: ./branch-source-builder/run_worker
+ unit-config: include-base64://configs/unit_config.yaml
         bsb-rabbit:
             branch: lp:~canonical-ci-engineering/charms/precise/ubuntu-ci-services-itself/rabbitmq-server
             charm: rabbitmq

I think this is what you guys were wanting, right?

This is config format agnostic which is probably useful. I did YAML locally, but the charm doesn't care.

Revision history for this message
Paul Larson (pwlars) wrote :

Yes, and I think the idea was to have just a single config file with all the auth data any of them care about (right now, I think it's just cloud and lp). Looks fine to me, except we'll need to just write that file and stick it in the other branch.
+1

review: Approve

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