An Open Question: Charm Dependency Management

[Charles Butler]

Lots of good feedback here with regard to how we want to manage it.

I'm personally +1 on having a Makefile in my charm that handles these
things, but was unsure if this was our defacto recommended path to
completion.

Thanks for such an active and rapid response on the thread.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Marco Ceppi <marco at ondina.co> wrote:

> Well there are two notions of testing, unit_test and functional_test one
> is largely more expensive than the other. Outside of that test-depends is a
> good one. Whatever it is we should identify those so we can make sure
> bundletester is updated to sniff these targets out (if this is the route we
> chose).
>
>
> On Tue Jan 20 2015 at 1:18:05 PM David Britton <
> david.britton at canonical.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 05:58:24PM +0000, Marco Ceppi wrote:
>> > I don't see how a Makefile in a charm doesn't resolve this issue.
>>
>> +1 on some standard published Makefile targets.  We already have some
>> that are highly recommended:
>>
>>  - test
>>  - lint
>>
>> Maybe:
>>
>>  - test-depends or depends  # to install/update dependencies needed for
>>                               testing
>>
>> Are there others that are needed/missing or that I forgot we already
>> have as standard?
>>
>> --
>> David Britton <david.britton at canonical.com>
>>
>


-- 
All the best,

Charles Butler <charles.butler at canonical.com> - Juju Charmer
Come see the future of datacenter orchestration: http://jujucharms.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20150120/068c95b5/attachment.html>