Hi Stavros, definitely target Juju 2.0. It's soon to be released and great changes some fundamentals of Juju in order to make it easier for users to use. You'll be much happier following the development release for this early project of yours. I'm a bit biased, but I also think that path 2, a real provider, is best because it lets you leverage the tooling around Juju that users come to expect to help them manage large deployments of big software on the cloud. While the first path might work out, I think in the long run you'll end up finding more work to make things work for your users as smoothly as you will get with path #2.
Please let me know if you have any other questions and I can't wait to see how it works out. On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 7:05 AM Stavros Sachtouris <saxto...@grnet.gr> wrote: > Hello, we are investigating the idea of a provider for our cloud > software "Synnefo". We are currently in the "proof of concept" stage, > but we like to plan ahead as early as possible, so I need your advice: > what version of Juju should we work with? Are there considerable changes > between the stable version and the one currently developed? > > More details on Synnefo and our Juju adventure: > > Synnefo (www.synnefo.org) is an OpenStack compatible (at least, in > theory :) ) IaaS software. It is open source (GPLv3). > The largest Synnefo deployment is ~okeanos (okeanos.grnet.gr) which > provides thousands of VMs and terabytes of storage resources to the > members of Greek and European accademic communities. > Both are developed and supported by the Greek Reasearch Network of > Technology (grnet.gr). > We considering Juju as a solution for providing PaaS services to our > users and we are in the investigation phase. > We found out there are two ways of utilizing Juju: > * we can use our own CLI to provision and register cloud resources to > Juju, which will allow our users to deploy their charms on predefined > sets of resources. This is easy to implement but requires more > operations on our part. > * we can "hack" into Juju and develop our own Synnefo provider with > full support. We cannot use the OpenStack provider out of the box, but > we can use most of it in our own extension. This will require > considerably more effort, but will allow our users to fully utilize Juju > on Synnefo and ~okeanos (e.g., GUI provisioning and scaling). > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > 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
