-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 125
docs: fix links that pointed to earlier Juju docs #1575
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
d94f13e
c7919c3
f08d83e
af94c83
96392bf
acada32
d788c66
65bbef2
d0a38f2
dc9fda3
5f4828a
a7a5df1
83bff61
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -136,7 +136,6 @@ It is in our interest to move the handler logic for each `/hooks/<hook_name>` to | |
- We can avoid code duplication by accessing shared data via the CharmBase interface provided through `self`. | ||
- The code is all in one place, easier to maintain. | ||
- We automatically have one Python object we can test, instead of going back and forth between Bash scripts and Python wrappers. | ||
- We can use [the awesome testing Harness](https://juju.is/docs/sdk/testing). | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. My reasoning for this change: The preceding bullet already mentions testing. And Harness is not considered so awesome any more 💔 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think it's fine to remove, but you could swap out Scenario for Harness (except you'd need to say "unit testing framework" or some other generic name) and it would still be true. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think it's best to omit the link here, as it's not something we want the reader to start working through right away. I'm adding a small section towards the end of the doc to remind the reader that they should write tests, with a link to Get started with charm testing. |
||
|
||
So let's do that. | ||
|
||
|
@@ -206,7 +205,7 @@ That allows us to fetch the Relation wherever we need it and access its contents | |
) | ||
``` | ||
|
||
Note how `relation.data` provides an interface to the relation databag (more on that [here](https://juju.is/docs/sdk/relations#heading--relation-data)) and we need to select which part of that bag to access by passing an `ops.model.Unit` instance. | ||
Note how `relation.data` provides an interface to the relation databag (see [](#set-up-a-relation)) and we need to select which part of that bag to access by passing an `ops.model.Unit` instance. | ||
|
||
#### Logging | ||
|
||
|
@@ -285,6 +284,9 @@ Furthermore we can get rid of the `start` handler, since the `snap.ensure()` cal | |
|
||
The final result can be inspected at [this branch](https://github.com/PietroPasotti/hooks-to-ops/tree/3-py-final). | ||
|
||
### Testing | ||
|
||
After you've prepared the event handlers, you should write tests for the charm. See [](/howto/get-started-with-charm-testing). | ||
|
||
## Closing notes | ||
|
||
|
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.