Alex Kavanagh

Does this also resolvee related issue: [LP#1772674](https://bugs.launchpad.net/charm-openstack-dashboard/+bug/1772674)? Also, let's raise a review on say the openstack-dashboard charm on gerrit that uses this code (either make sync on a classic charm,...

> I think we are in the loop. There is no suitable library in the Ubuntu archive as of right now. And using a bare openssl is tricky and requires...

So the associated review needs work (a c-h sync from this branch/PR) before it can verify the changes.

@rahulsinghcanonical Just to clarify: > So the associated review needs work (a c-h sync from this branch/PR) before it can verify the changes. What I mean is, that an API...

H @wolsen what's the status of this change, please? It's targeted against stable/21.04 which is now EOL (due to charmhub migration), and thus I was wondering if we can close...

It's a bug in distro-info due to pip 21 being more picky about consistency in version numbers specified in the package. Affects charm-helpers. Also, pip 21 drops support for py27...

Note that using `make` is deprecated (really). There is a `tox.ini` file which pins pip appropriately, and (hopefully) `tox -e py3` works?

> Getting a deprecate warning or deleting Makefile would be nice though. That's a fair point. We should really get rid of it; I think it's just old cruft now,...

> > However, the Storage class initialise function _has_ a path variable to allow multiple `Storage` objects to co-exist, so the ops framework could use. Or it could set the...

This is an interesting bug report, and I didn't even realise that the unit db kept this data. I wonder why? I can understand keeping data for the main hooks,...