On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 7:56:37 PM UTC, Dave Murphy wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 7:03:36 PM UTC, Bruno Girin wrote:
>>
>> So I'd much rather have the charm auto-generate part of the config in a
>> sensible way and then tell people: if you use Juju, don't provide those
>> settings in y
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 7:03:36 PM UTC, Bruno Girin wrote:
>
> So I'd much rather have the charm auto-generate part of the config in a
> sensible way and then tell people: if you use Juju, don't provide those
> settings in your config, the charm will do it.
>
...and if they do? How is this any
For what it's worth, "other PaaS solutions" solve this by letting people
call a python function from settings.py
I think it's a good solution.
On Mar 5, 2013 8:04 PM, "Bruno Girin" wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, 5 March 2013 13:35:41 UTC, Dave Murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 1:17:13 PM U
On Tuesday, 5 March 2013 13:35:41 UTC, Dave Murphy wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 1:17:13 PM UTC, Michael wrote:
>>
>> Are there other better options that wouldn't force people to change their
>> code to use the charm?
>>
>
> For the charm to be of sufficient value, it needs to be opiniona
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 1:17:13 PM UTC, Michael wrote:
>
> Are there other better options that wouldn't force people to change their
> code to use the charm?
>
For the charm to be of sufficient value, it needs to be opinionated,
otherwise it's going to suffer from trying to work out-of-the-box
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Dave Murphy wrote:
> On Sunday, March 3, 2013 4:45:56 PM UTC, Bruno Girin wrote:
>
>> Patrick solved that problem by separating different config elements in
>> different files but this implies that juju'ised applications would need to
>> follow the same structure.
On Sunday, March 3, 2013 4:45:56 PM UTC, Bruno Girin wrote:
> Patrick solved that problem by separating different config elements in
> different files but this implies that juju'ised applications would need to
> follow the same structure. Is that a good idea?
If you're aiming for a PaaS-style
On Sunday, 3 March 2013 17:45:56 UTC+1, Bruno Girin wrote:
> The main stumbling block at the moment and for which we could do with
> Django expertise is about the structure of the settings files. Some
> settings are application specific and should be left alone by Juju, others
> are environment
Hi Chris,
I've been working with Patrick on this charm and I implemented a simple
version of support for private repositories. It basically creates a .netrc
file with the user name and password for the correct machine. It's not
ideal but it did enable me to get code from a private github repo.
Hi Patrick,
Great to hear you're interested in writing a Django charm for juju! I have
toyed around with the idea, but never got around to implementing something
good.
I started looking at the current Django charm a little while ago, and while
it works to some extend I think we could make reall
Hi,
I'm building a Juju based Open Source Paas platform for Django and
I need your help because it is a hard task to make a PAAS system
that is flexible enough to deploy any projects and at the same time
simple to use.
For the ones that don't know Juju, it's a service orchestration software
compa
11 matches
Mail list logo
