Closed sed-i closed 3 months ago
We could half a blueprint dedicated to rockcraft, but as you say, the only difference from docker bp would probably be just portainer. How about adding rockcraft to the charm-dev blueprint? Would you be ok with that?
Hey @sed-i,
I say if rockcraft
is pretty relevant to what's already contained in the charm-dev
Blueprint, I'm fine with that. One thing is that the charm-dev
Blueprint already does quite a bit of bootstrapping at launch
and this will just make it even more heavy. That said, charm-dev
is intended for developers, so if they are ok with this, then I am too.
@sed-i, are you OK with closing this now?
Alright, going ahead and closing this. Please reopen if necessary.
Sorry @ricab, just saw this now. Rockcraft is now part of charm-dev, so solves some set of problems :)
I think more than anything else, the value of this PR was in the iptables commands that let docker coexist with rockcraft. In any case, we can keep this closed.
Tested manually by copying the cloud init part into its own yaml and