Skip to content
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

remove consul service stanza from job init --short example jobspec #6179

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 27, 2019

Conversation

jazzyfresh
Copy link
Contributor

@jazzyfresh jazzyfresh commented Aug 21, 2019

It seems standard to remove the networking component from the example jobspec that is produced by job init --short. This is an attempt to clean it up for the bare minimum for development.

Todo

  • regenerate job init assets

@@ -16,24 +16,6 @@ job "example" {
resources {
cpu = 500
memory = 256

network {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think you are going to still need the dynamic port.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the network stanza is good to keep, as db port is used above; but let's remove service stanza here.

@jazzyfresh jazzyfresh merged commit d29fa2b into master Aug 27, 2019
@jazzyfresh jazzyfresh deleted the f-job-init-shorter branch August 27, 2019 14:36
@jazzyfresh jazzyfresh changed the title remove networking from job init --short example jobspec remove consul service stanza from job init --short example jobspec Sep 5, 2019
@github-actions
Copy link

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 120 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 31, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants