Excerpts from William Reade's message of Wed Feb 22 08:32:20 UTC 2012:
> charm download:
>
> Agreed not necessary. I believe it's not actively harmful, though...
> have I missed something?
>
Understood, makes sense, and no you have not missed anything.
> config-changed:
>
> As I recall, this has always been run automatically when a unit starts
> up; again, it may be redundant, but I don't *think* it'll be harmful.
>
Actually I kind of like this.. re-asserting as often as makes sense is
good, and after a reboot/restart, that actually makes a lot of sense.
> missing machine:
>
> Hmm, I guess we should filter slightly differently in the ec2 provider
> -- we should include stopped machines but not terminated ones. (we
> should also not filter whatever the moving-to-stopped state is
> ("shutting-down"?)... and if that means we still see machines in the
> process of termination, so be it).
>
> IMO these are 3 distinct bugs, and I don't personally see the first two
> as very high priority; I'm not entirely clear on the ramifications of a
> config-changed change, but the others should be pretty trivial to fix.
> Opinions?
>
The first two aren't even bugs IMO. Lets just leave them be. For the other
one, sounds like its just a cosmetic bug. You sound like you understand
it better than I, so please do flesh out the details in a bug report.
Excerpts from William Reade's message of Wed Feb 22 08:32:20 UTC 2012:
> charm download:
>
> Agreed not necessary. I believe it's not actively harmful, though...
> have I missed something?
>
Understood, makes sense, and no you have not missed anything.
> config-changed:
>
> As I recall, this has always been run automatically when a unit starts
> up; again, it may be redundant, but I don't *think* it'll be harmful.
>
Actually I kind of like this.. re-asserting as often as makes sense is
good, and after a reboot/restart, that actually makes a lot of sense.
> missing machine: down"?) ... and if that means we still see machines in the
>
> Hmm, I guess we should filter slightly differently in the ec2 provider
> -- we should include stopped machines but not terminated ones. (we
> should also not filter whatever the moving-to-stopped state is
> ("shutting-
> process of termination, so be it).
>
> IMO these are 3 distinct bugs, and I don't personally see the first two
> as very high priority; I'm not entirely clear on the ramifications of a
> config-changed change, but the others should be pretty trivial to fix.
> Opinions?
>
The first two aren't even bugs IMO. Lets just leave them be. For the other
one, sounds like its just a cosmetic bug. You sound like you understand
it better than I, so please do flesh out the details in a bug report.