FWIW, I have used sym links in a couple of charms [0] [1]. This seems like a perfectly rational thing to do. I suspect it could be leveraged even further as @Xav Paice suggests. @Alex Kavanagh, I think this is a separate issue from mojo, as this primarily pertains to Zaza tests. Also, the build process removes the sym-links and creates separate files for us in a built charm. [0] https://github.com/openstack/charm-mysql-innodb-cluster/tree/master/src/test... [1] https://github.com/openstack-charmers/charm-ceph-benchmarking/tree/master/te... -- David Ames On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 4:07 AM Chris MacNaughton <chris.macnaughton@canonical.com> wrote:
I think I remember that a conscious decision was made to avoid using symlinks for the bundles due to the hell that openstack-mojo-specs descended into? Liam may want to wade in on this?
Broadly, this is one of the reasons I proposed submitting a review of a single charm to be a practical example of what this would look like, and how complex it would be. It should also help us, as a project, identify if the repetition is enough that symlinks, or refactoring the library, would be worthwhile.
Chris