Review TLS charms for Listing

charmhub requests review requests
2

Hi,

@gruyaume, thank you for your charmhub request. Before making them searchable, we’ll first need to do a review of the charms.

@sed-i, can you please assist Guillaume by going through and ticking of the items on the checklist available here and post the result in this thread? This prior listing request could serve as an example of how to go about it.

@mcjaeger, one thing that comes to mind from this post is that we probably should mention in your review documentation that it’ll be easier to process if each review request only contains one charm?

Thanks

3

It looks like both the tls-certificates-operator charm and the self-signed-certificates operator charm can generate self-signed certificates? Wouldn’t it be better to have just one charm that can do this and another than that be configured with certificates? Seems like it could be a little confusing for operators otherwise about which charm they should use in what circumstances.

4

Hi @mthaddon, the TLS Certificates Operator does not support self-signed certificates in its edge and beta channels and we will soon promote this behaviour to stable. We do have a legacy track that still contains this same behaviour because it is needed by the Data Platform team. As soon as they move over we’ll get rid of this track as well.

1 Like
5

Cool, thanks for the explanation

6

I agree, it makes a lot of sense, will update the description.

7

manual-tls-certificates

Review item Objective Review criteria Notes
Intended functionality Despite all the items for publication readiness, the charm must work. Charm does what it is meant to do - ideally done in a demo. PASSED
Charmhub.io charm detail page A complete and consistent appearance of the charm is required for a quality impression of the charm collection. The overall appearance looks good, which means: * The name complies with the naming guidelines. * The publisher is identified. * The links are provided. * The documentation looks reasonable. PASSED
Source repository Generally, the source code for charms must be accessible by the community for transparency and collaboration. It is not entirely mandatory to have the charm published as OSS for review, but the repository must be accessible from the persons working on the review request. PASSED
Coding conventions The source code of the charm is accessible in the sense of approachability. Consistent source code style and formatting are also considered a sign of being committed to quality. The implemented checks for coding conventions are reasonable and implemented in the regular CI/CD implementation. PASSED
Release automation implementation An implementation for automated releasing to charmhub.io improves the ability to provide updates covering vulnerabilities quickly. Release automation for unstable channels to enable testing when new versions of the charm code or the workload become available. PASSED
Unit tests implementation In particular, for the charms review, assuring a reasonable test suite is essential to allow for automated releases in future. The unit tests show relevant coverage. It is a case-dependent review.At the time of review, the test runs successfully. PASSED
Unit tests results Availability of test results is mandatory for a working collaborative project. URL to test results from CI/CD automation. PASSED
Installation test implemented (could be part of the integration test) In particular, for the charm review, assuring a reasonable test suite is essential to allow for automated releases in future. With this test, for every build, it is ensured that the installation is successful. An implementation for checking the installation is present. The implementation should also check for successful installation as part of the automation, and the workload behaves as expected. At the time of review, the test runs successfully. PASSED
Installation test results Availability of test results is mandatory for a working collaborative project. URL to test results from CI/CD automation. PASSED
Integration tests implemented In particular for the review of charms, assuring a reasonable test suite is important to allow for automated releases in future. With this test, for every build, it is ensured that the integration with other charms is successful. An implementation for testing the required integrations (if applicable) is present. The implementation should also check for successful integration as part of he automation and the workload behaves as expected. At the time of review, the test runs successfully. PASSED
Integration test results Availability of test results is mandatory for a working collaborative project. URL to test results from CI/CD automation. PASSED
Documentation for usage The documentation for using the charm should be separate from the documentation for developing or contributing to the charm. URL to this documentation is present. PASSED
Documentation for contributing The documentation for contributing to the charm should be separate from the documentation for developing or using the charm. URL to this documentation is present. PASSED
Licensing statement For the charm shared, OSS or not, the licensing terms of the charm are clarified (which also implies an identified authorship of the charm). URL to the ruling licensing statement is present. PASSED

self-signed-certificates

Review item Review criteria Evidence / notes
Charmhub.io charm detail page The overall charmhub.io appearance looks good, which means: * The name complies with the naming guidelines. * The publisher is identified. * The links are provided. * The documentation looks reasonable. PASSED
Source repository Link to source repository accessible by reviewer PASSED
Coding conventions A reasonable styleguide is enforced in tox.ini/similar and in CI/CD. PASSED
Release automation implementation CI auto releases charm to edge on merge. PASSED
Unit tests implementation Unit tests are run in CI, pass, have at least 50% coverage, and their results are available to the reviewer. PASSED
Integration tests implemented Integration tests for installation, usage and relations are run in CI, pass, and their results are available to the reviewer. PASSED
Documentation for usage A usage doc exists separate from README.md. PASSED
Documentation for contributing A contributing doc (e.g. CONTRIBUTING.md) exists. PASSED
Licensing statement LICENCE is clearly available to potential users. PASSED

vault

Review item Review criteria Evidence / notes
Charmhub.io charm detail page The overall charmhub.io appearance looks good, which means: * The name complies with the naming guidelines. * The publisher is identified. * The links are provided. * The documentation looks reasonable. PASSED
Source repository Link to source repository accessible by reviewer PASSED
Coding conventions A reasonable styleguide is enforced in tox.ini/similar and in CI/CD. PASSED
Release automation implementation CI auto releases charm to edge on merge. PASSED
Unit tests implementation Unit tests are run in CI, pass, have at least 50% coverage, and their results are available to the reviewer. PASSED
Integration tests implemented Integration tests for installation, usage and relations are run in CI, pass, and their results are available to the reviewer. PASSED
Documentation for usage A usage doc exists separate from README.md. PASSED
Documentation for contributing A contributing doc (e.g. CONTRIBUTING.md) exists. PASSED
Licensing statement LICENCE is clearly available to potential users. PASSED

First iteration done @gruyaume @0x12b

8

Hello,

TLS Certificates Operator

We changed the name to manual-tls-certificates. Here is the the associated PR and new project in charmhub:

There is a request out there to have the ownership changed to Canonical Telco but that should not be a blocker for the review process.

Self-signed certificates

  1. Missing backlinks to repos and issues: This is fixed in the edge channel.
  2. Reference doc links are all broken. I don’t have the necessary access to edit other people’s discourse post. @gatici, can you please remove the reference section altogether here, people can directly click on actions and other items.

Vault

  1. No docs: This is fixed now. Btw do we really want the charm review process to validate diataxis?
  2. See above
1 Like
9

Reference section is removed from Self Signed X.509 Certificates Documentation.

10

@sed-i Can you please re-review?

11

Hi @gruyaume, @gatici

Re manual-tls-certificates-operator: the docs still reference the old name. Is that intentional?

13

No this was not intentional, I just asked @dariofaccin to address this as I don’t have the necessary permissions to do so.

14

@sed-i this is fixed now. I believe we ticked all the boxes :slight_smile:

15

Hurray! Updated.

1 Like
16

Thank you @sed-i!

@0x12b @mcjaeger Can we get these 3 charms published now? :slight_smile:

17

@gruyaume, If you agree to provide one individual post per charm next time? :slight_smile:

@odysseus-k could we ask you to set the three charms to listed?

2 Likes
18

@odysseus-k @mcjaeger

There’s a mistake in the charms you referenced. The 3 ones to list are:

Manual TLS Certificates is the new name for the charm as discussed above.

1 Like
19

Hi,

are now listed.

Thanks,

Odysseus

1 Like
20

They don’t show up in the search, is there a delay?

21

Hi,

For the charms to show up there needs to be at least one revision published as stable. AFAICT, none of these 3 charms currently have a revision published as such.

Thanks,

Odysseus

22

Ok thank you!