On 20/11/13 15:10, Nate Finch wrote: > That seems like the less useful direction for backwards compatibility. > There's very little barrier to upgrading the client, so maintaining > backwards compatibility in the server for it seems like a waste. > > But I may be missing something.
What I'm referring to is the api server, and the agents as clients, not the command line. Tim > On Nov 19, 2013 8:43 PM, "Tim Penhey" <tim.pen...@canonical.com > <mailto:tim.pen...@canonical.com>> wrote: > > On 20/11/13 12:05, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote: > > I am not sure if I am leading a discussion or just stating that we > > have a problem that I don't believe can be ever solved. > > > > We abandoned the release of 1.16.4 because we found it was > > incompatible with 1.16.3 > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1252469 > > "API incompatability: ERROR no such request "DestroyMachines" > on Client" > > > > I now believe this bug is in the same class of problem: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1250154 > > "ERROR no such request "EnvironmentGet" on Client" > > It was my understanding that the api server needs to be at least as > advanced as any client. > > This means that a 1.18 server should be able to support a 1.16.x client. > > However we don't support 1.18 clients on a 1.16.x server. > > Does this change your thinking? > > Tim > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
