Re: List plugins installed?

[Stuart Bishop]

On 30 September 2016 at 04:47, Nate Finch  wrote:

> Seem alike the easiest thing to do is have a designated plugin directory
> and have juju install  copy the binary/script there.  Then
> we're only running plugins the user has specifically asked to install.
>

This does not work if the plugin has dependencies, such as the Python
standard library or external tools such as git or graphviz. Nothing running
inside the snap containment can access stuff outside of the containment.

I think it will be more complex solution that needs to be designed with the
snappy team. As far as I can tell its either going to need a small daemon
running outside of containment and a way of passing messages to it (such as
how a snap can open a web page in a browser running outside of
containment), or having plugins distributed as snaps and somehow allowing
the juju snap to call executables in these plugin snaps.

(which is going to take time, so I guess we need to keep the existing
mechanism going a while longer and the snap in devmode)

-- 
Stuart Bishop 
-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: List plugins installed?

[Stuart Bishop]

On 30 September 2016 at 04:47, Nate Finch  wrote:

> Seem alike the easiest thing to do is have a designated plugin directory
> and have juju install  copy the binary/script there.  Then
> we're only running plugins the user has specifically asked to install.
>

This does not work if the plugin has dependencies, such as the Python
standard library or external tools such as git or graphviz. Nothing running
inside the snap containment can access stuff outside of the containment.

I think it will be more complex solution that needs to be designed with the
snappy team. As far as I can tell its either going to need a small daemon
running outside of containment and a way of passing messages to it (such as
how a snap can open a web page in a browser running outside of
containment), or having plugins distributed as snaps and somehow allowing
the juju snap to call executables in these plugin snaps.

(which is going to take time, so I guess we need to keep the existing
mechanism going a while longer and the snap in devmode)

-- 
Stuart Bishop 
-- 
Juju-dev mailing list
Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev

Re: List plugins installed?

[Tim Penhey]

Thanks Marco.

Would be good to have something solid to drive the plug-in changes with.

Tim

On 30/09/16 11:16, Marco Ceppi wrote:

Thanks have some ideas about this, I'll file a bug (blueprint?) about
it. I really care about plugins and would like to make them more robust
in Juju.

Marco


On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 6:07 PM Tim Penhey > wrote:

If we do that, then we can make the plug-in also install a metadata file
that explains help and usage, so you don't call the script to do that.

It makes it easy to list plug-ins, because you are searching a known
location, and not the entire path. Only show plug-ins that have the
appropriate meta-data file.

Tim

On 30/09/16 10:47, Nate Finch wrote:
> Seem alike the easiest thing to do is have a designated plugin
directory
> and have juju install  copy the binary/script there.
> Then we're only running plugins the user has specifically asked to
install.
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:33 AM Stuart Bishop

> >> wrote:
>
> On 28 September 2016 at 22:45, roger peppe
> 
>> wrote:
>
> On 28 September 2016 at 14:55, Rick Harding
> 
>>
> wrote:
> > This is just a miss. The original ability to see the
plugins was a subset of
> > the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for
things to rework. I
> > agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that
means that plugins
> > becomes a noun in our language.
> >
> > What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
> > installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might
be interesting to
> > auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI
alignment with the new
> > world order.
>
> I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think
that we
> should
> arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-"
> prefix.
> It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that
although git
> relies heavily
> on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly
> name it).
>
> Perhaps there could be a standard way for a plugin to provide
> metadata about itself as a data file.
>
>
> It also might be time to work out how a Juju snap is going to call
> or install plugins. I don't think the existing design is going to
> work, and there is still time to flag it as deprecated in the
> changelogs for 2.0 and work out the way forward for 2.1.
>
>
> --
> Stuart Bishop 
> >>
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> juju-...@lists.ubuntu.com 
>
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>
>
>

--
Juju-dev mailing list
juju-...@lists.ubuntu.com 
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev



--
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: List plugins installed?

[Marco Ceppi]

Thanks have some ideas about this, I'll file a bug (blueprint?) about it. I
really care about plugins and would like to make them more robust in Juju.

Marco

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 6:07 PM Tim Penhey  wrote:

> If we do that, then we can make the plug-in also install a metadata file
> that explains help and usage, so you don't call the script to do that.
>
> It makes it easy to list plug-ins, because you are searching a known
> location, and not the entire path. Only show plug-ins that have the
> appropriate meta-data file.
>
> Tim
>
> On 30/09/16 10:47, Nate Finch wrote:
> > Seem alike the easiest thing to do is have a designated plugin directory
> > and have juju install  copy the binary/script there.
> > Then we're only running plugins the user has specifically asked to
> install.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:33 AM Stuart Bishop  > > wrote:
> >
> > On 28 September 2016 at 22:45, roger peppe
> > >
> wrote:
> >
> > On 28 September 2016 at 14:55, Rick Harding
> > >
> > wrote:
> > > This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins
> was a subset of
> > > the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for
> things to rework. I
> > > agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means
> that plugins
> > > becomes a noun in our language.
> > >
> > > What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
> > > installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be
> interesting to
> > > auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment
> with the new
> > > world order.
> >
> > I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we
> > should
> > arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-"
> > prefix.
> > It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git
> > relies heavily
> > on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly
> > name it).
> >
> > Perhaps there could be a standard way for a plugin to provide
> > metadata about itself as a data file.
> >
> >
> > It also might be time to work out how a Juju snap is going to call
> > or install plugins. I don't think the existing design is going to
> > work, and there is still time to flag it as deprecated in the
> > changelogs for 2.0 and work out the way forward for 2.1.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stuart Bishop  > >
> > --
> > Juju-dev mailing list
> > juju-...@lists.ubuntu.com 
> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> juju-...@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>
-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: List plugins installed?

[Marco Ceppi]

Thanks have some ideas about this, I'll file a bug (blueprint?) about it. I
really care about plugins and would like to make them more robust in Juju.

Marco

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 6:07 PM Tim Penhey  wrote:

> If we do that, then we can make the plug-in also install a metadata file
> that explains help and usage, so you don't call the script to do that.
>
> It makes it easy to list plug-ins, because you are searching a known
> location, and not the entire path. Only show plug-ins that have the
> appropriate meta-data file.
>
> Tim
>
> On 30/09/16 10:47, Nate Finch wrote:
> > Seem alike the easiest thing to do is have a designated plugin directory
> > and have juju install  copy the binary/script there.
> > Then we're only running plugins the user has specifically asked to
> install.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:33 AM Stuart Bishop  > > wrote:
> >
> > On 28 September 2016 at 22:45, roger peppe
> > >
> wrote:
> >
> > On 28 September 2016 at 14:55, Rick Harding
> > >
> > wrote:
> > > This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins
> was a subset of
> > > the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for
> things to rework. I
> > > agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means
> that plugins
> > > becomes a noun in our language.
> > >
> > > What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
> > > installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be
> interesting to
> > > auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment
> with the new
> > > world order.
> >
> > I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we
> > should
> > arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-"
> > prefix.
> > It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git
> > relies heavily
> > on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly
> > name it).
> >
> > Perhaps there could be a standard way for a plugin to provide
> > metadata about itself as a data file.
> >
> >
> > It also might be time to work out how a Juju snap is going to call
> > or install plugins. I don't think the existing design is going to
> > work, and there is still time to flag it as deprecated in the
> > changelogs for 2.0 and work out the way forward for 2.1.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stuart Bishop  > >
> > --
> > 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
>
-- 
Juju-dev mailing list
Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev

Re: List plugins installed?

[Tim Penhey]

If we do that, then we can make the plug-in also install a metadata file 
that explains help and usage, so you don't call the script to do that.


It makes it easy to list plug-ins, because you are searching a known 
location, and not the entire path. Only show plug-ins that have the 
appropriate meta-data file.


Tim

On 30/09/16 10:47, Nate Finch wrote:

Seem alike the easiest thing to do is have a designated plugin directory
and have juju install  copy the binary/script there.
Then we're only running plugins the user has specifically asked to install.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:33 AM Stuart Bishop > wrote:

On 28 September 2016 at 22:45, roger peppe
> wrote:

On 28 September 2016 at 14:55, Rick Harding
>
wrote:
> This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins was a 
subset of
> the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for things to 
rework. I
> agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means that 
plugins
> becomes a noun in our language.
>
> What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
> installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be 
interesting to
> auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment with 
the new
> world order.

I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we
should
arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-"
prefix.
It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git
relies heavily
on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly
name it).

Perhaps there could be a standard way for a plugin to provide
metadata about itself as a data file.


It also might be time to work out how a Juju snap is going to call
or install plugins. I don't think the existing design is going to
work, and there is still time to flag it as deprecated in the
changelogs for 2.0 and work out the way forward for 2.1.


--
Stuart Bishop >
--
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

Re: List plugins installed?

[Nate Finch]

Seem alike the easiest thing to do is have a designated plugin directory
and have juju install  copy the binary/script there.  Then
we're only running plugins the user has specifically asked to install.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:33 AM Stuart Bishop 
wrote:

> On 28 September 2016 at 22:45, roger peppe 
> wrote:
>
>> On 28 September 2016 at 14:55, Rick Harding 
>> wrote:
>> > This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins was a
>> subset of
>> > the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for things to
>> rework. I
>> > agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means that
>> plugins
>> > becomes a noun in our language.
>> >
>> > What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
>> > installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be interesting
>> to
>> > auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment with the
>> new
>> > world order.
>>
>> I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we should
>> arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-" prefix.
>> It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git relies
>> heavily
>> on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly name it).
>>
>> Perhaps there could be a standard way for a plugin to provide
>> metadata about itself as a data file.
>>
>>
> It also might be time to work out how a Juju snap is going to call or
> install plugins. I don't think the existing design is going to work, and
> there is still time to flag it as deprecated in the changelogs for 2.0 and
> work out the way forward for 2.1.
>
>
> --
> Stuart Bishop 
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> juju-...@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>
-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: List plugins installed?

[Nate Finch]

Seem alike the easiest thing to do is have a designated plugin directory
and have juju install  copy the binary/script there.  Then
we're only running plugins the user has specifically asked to install.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:33 AM Stuart Bishop 
wrote:

> On 28 September 2016 at 22:45, roger peppe 
> wrote:
>
>> On 28 September 2016 at 14:55, Rick Harding 
>> wrote:
>> > This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins was a
>> subset of
>> > the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for things to
>> rework. I
>> > agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means that
>> plugins
>> > becomes a noun in our language.
>> >
>> > What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
>> > installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be interesting
>> to
>> > auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment with the
>> new
>> > world order.
>>
>> I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we should
>> arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-" prefix.
>> It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git relies
>> heavily
>> on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly name it).
>>
>> Perhaps there could be a standard way for a plugin to provide
>> metadata about itself as a data file.
>>
>>
> It also might be time to work out how a Juju snap is going to call or
> install plugins. I don't think the existing design is going to work, and
> there is still time to flag it as deprecated in the changelogs for 2.0 and
> work out the way forward for 2.1.
>
>
> --
> Stuart Bishop 
> --
> 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

Re: List plugins installed?

[Mark Shuttleworth]

On 28/09/16 17:45, roger peppe wrote:
> I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we should
> arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-" prefix.
> It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git relies heavily
> on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly name it).

+1

-- 
Juju-dev mailing list
Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev

Re: List plugins installed?

[Mark Shuttleworth]

On 28/09/16 17:45, roger peppe wrote:
> I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we should
> arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-" prefix.
> It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git relies heavily
> on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly name it).

+1

-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: List plugins installed?

[roger peppe]

On 28 September 2016 at 14:55, Rick Harding  wrote:
> This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins was a subset of
> the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for things to rework. I
> agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means that plugins
> becomes a noun in our language.
>
> What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
> installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be interesting to
> auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment with the new
> world order.

I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we should
arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-" prefix.
It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git relies heavily
on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly name it).

Perhaps there could be a standard way for a plugin to provide
metadata about itself as a data file.

  cheers,
rog.

-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

Re: List plugins installed?

[roger peppe]

On 28 September 2016 at 14:55, Rick Harding  wrote:
> This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins was a subset of
> the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for things to rework. I
> agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means that plugins
> becomes a noun in our language.
>
> What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
> installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be interesting to
> auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment with the new
> world order.

I've voiced discomfort with this before - I don't think that we should
arbitrarily run all executables that happen to have a "juju-" prefix.
It's potentially dangerous (for example, note that although git relies heavily
on plugins, it doesn't execute a plugin until you explicitly name it).

Perhaps there could be a standard way for a plugin to provide
metadata about itself as a data file.

  cheers,
rog.

-- 
Juju-dev mailing list
Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev

Re: List plugins installed?

[Rick Harding]

This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins was a subset
of the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for things to
rework. I agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means
that plugins becomes a noun in our language.

What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be interesting to
auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment with the new
world order.

I've filed a bug to track adding the support for plugin into the CLI.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1628538

Thanks for the catch Marco!



On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:24 AM Marco Ceppi 
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> I've started building plugins again, starting with `juju watch-status`[0].
> I wanted to test the --description flag in Juju but `juju help plugins` and
> a myriad of other commands (I guessed) didn't work (juju list-plugins, juju
> plugins, etc).
>
> Do we plan on having the ability to list plugins in 2.0?
>
> [0]: https://github.com/juju/plugins/pull/69
>
> Thanks,
> Marco Ceppi
> --
> 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

Re: List plugins installed?

[Rick Harding]

This is just a miss. The original ability to see the plugins was a subset
of the help command and didn't make our CLI spreadsheet for things to
rework. I agree that list-plugins is the right idea here and that means
that plugins becomes a noun in our language.

What's interesting is that add/remove fall out because that
installing/uninstalling. I think that show-plugin might be interesting to
auto run the --description flag to bring it into CLI alignment with the new
world order.

I've filed a bug to track adding the support for plugin into the CLI.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1628538

Thanks for the catch Marco!



On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:24 AM Marco Ceppi 
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> I've started building plugins again, starting with `juju watch-status`[0].
> I wanted to test the --description flag in Juju but `juju help plugins` and
> a myriad of other commands (I guessed) didn't work (juju list-plugins, juju
> plugins, etc).
>
> Do we plan on having the ability to list plugins in 2.0?
>
> [0]: https://github.com/juju/plugins/pull/69
>
> Thanks,
> Marco Ceppi
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> juju-...@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>
-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju

List plugins installed?

[Marco Ceppi]

Hello everyone,

I've started building plugins again, starting with `juju watch-status`[0].
I wanted to test the --description flag in Juju but `juju help plugins` and
a myriad of other commands (I guessed) didn't work (juju list-plugins, juju
plugins, etc).

Do we plan on having the ability to list plugins in 2.0?

[0]: https://github.com/juju/plugins/pull/69

Thanks,
Marco Ceppi
-- 
Juju mailing list
Juju@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju