As promised partners making use of juju as part of the OpenStack Interoperability Lab (OIL) include:
- IBM - Microsoft - Intel - AMD - HP - Juniper - Lenovo - Melanox - Metaswitch - OCP (Open Compute Project) - SanDisk - VMWare There are actually quite a few more, but that should give you some confidence that we are building traction with many infrastructure providers of all kinds. On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Mark Ramm-Christensen (Canonical.com) < mark.ramm-christen...@canonical.com> wrote: > Well, I can provide a few things off the top of my head that should help. > > - Canonical is fully committed to Juju as the way we deploy software > internally, the way we deploy Open Stack clouds for our largest clients > - Windows workloads are supported in the current beta version of Juju, > and should after a bit of real-world testing be fully supported in one of > the next (bi-monthly) production ready releases. > - CentOS support is nearly feature complete, and should enter a beta > release of Juju for testing within the next month. Like windows it will > flow to a production release after it's had some real-world tests. > > There are quite a few big companies working on juju charms. IBM for > example is delivering quite a few charms and has committed multiple full > time development resources to working with juju. > > There are also quite a few other big names working on juju charms -- many > of them in the OpenStack space. I'll get a list of folks who are already > public about being part of our juju based openstack integration labs for > you as soon as I can. > > We also have some big plans for products built on top of juju. The first > of which is the OpenStack Autopilot which automates the deployment, > scale-out, and management of OpenStack clouds. But, we are also building > more products on top of Juju right now, and it is core to our future plans > in the cloud. > > So, to make a long story short, I think juju is gaining traction with some > big enterprise players, Canonical is fully committed to Juju, and we are > seeing momentum pick up in the marketplace. So, I personally would > definitely bet on a bright future for Juju. > > --Mark Ramm > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Merlijn Sebrechts < > merlijn.sebrec...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> >> I'm interested in what the future of Juju is. From the small experience >> I've had with it, it seems like a product with a lot of potential. It fills >> a gap in our project that no other technology can fill. Its biggest >> strength is how relations between services are managed. This is something >> that, to my knowledge, does not exist in any tool today. It enables a very >> modular approach and solves a lot of problems we would have with other >> tools. >> >> However, I've also seen some things that worry me. Even after three >> years, there are still a lot of bugs in the project. The documentation is >> lacking, especially in the parts of Juju that are the most competitive. The >> community is also very small. The fact that it can still only manage Ubuntu >> servers worries me too. I could go more into detail here, but I don't think >> it is relevant to this question. >> >> I'm considering starting a big long-term project on top of Juju. The >> project would be very dependent on Juju, so I don't want to do this if >> there is a chance that Juju will be abandoned in 5 years... >> >> What can you tell me about the future of Juju? Things I'm interested in: >> >> - Big companies building services on top of Juju >> >> - Statements of long-term commitment from Canonical >> >> - Usage statistics >> >> - Statements of commitment to support other distro's >> >> - .. or else, signs that Juju doesn't have a bright future. >> >> >> Thanks >> >> -- >> Juju mailing list >> Juju@lists.ubuntu.com >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju >> >> >
-- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju