Re: What's the future of Juju?
Hey Merlijn, I'm a bit late to this thread, but wanted to thank you for calling out the FOSDEM talk this year :) That was me on stage giving the overview. Really glad you took the time to reach out and get some answers. If there's anything else we can do for you feel free to drop by #juju on irc.freenode.net - i'm lazypower. All the best, Charles Butler charles.but...@canonical.com - Juju Charmer Come see the future of datacenter orchestration: http://jujucharms.com On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Merlijn Sebrechts merlijn.sebrec...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks to everyone for taking the time to answer this so thoroughly! The project is clearly going in a direction that will be very beneficial to us. The monitoring, multi-user and cross-platform features will come in very handy! I do agree with Mark that writing charms has been poorly documented. Writing charms in Bash is pretty well documented and has some good examples, but this is much less the case for python. Writing Charms in Bash is a great way to get started with Juju, but scripts get very complicated very fast. The python-charmhelpers modules seem to have some pretty strong features, but they aren't well documented. It seems like you brag about your beginner features but you keep quiet about what makes Juju charms really competitive... This might contribute to the (incorrect) idea people have about what Juju is. A lot of people I speak to think Juju is Chef/puppet for people who want a nice gui. Although this idea is slowly changing.. Talks like the one at Fosdem this year help spread the word about what Juju exactly is.. 2015-03-27 15:58 GMT+01:00 Mark Shuttleworth m...@ubuntu.com: On 25/03/15 20:01, Merlijn Sebrechts wrote: 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. Yes, agreed! 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 understand what you mean. In part I think this comes from the team being focused on getting to our key Juju 2.0 milestone, and perhaps not taking as much time to celebrate the smaller milestones on the way, especially when they are things that we know need a little more work. For example, the Windows and CentOS support that has landed is a huge step, but we know it is still a bit rough and needs more polish. Perhaps we should be louder about some of those steps to draw in people who could help provide feedback and patches! 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... No chance of that. In my travels now I am glad to say I see a shift in the way people engage with us about Juju. It used to be why would you want to compete with Puppet? but now folks understand that we do not want to compete with Puppet, we want to come up a level and enable people to collaborate and reuse their puppet / chef / bash / python across different clouds and environments. That focus on collaboration and reuse is what makes Juju special. In the long run we will integrate Juju into places like HEAT so you get the benefit of charms, together with the underlying cloud information about performance, so that things like autoscaling are magical, but in the short term it's easy to think the projects compete. But folks are starting to understand that now, so I don't get asked why do you not just do HEAT?. I also think that it will emerge that there are many levels of orchestration; Juju will be the BEST for the lowest level of infrastructure orchestration, but people will use Juju to deploy things like PAAS which themselves offer a kind of orchestration. So end-users might use a PAAS, which is like a model or API or orchestration system, and underneath that, administrators will use Juju for the base level. We won't try to push Juju into every layer; just like we have kept MAAS and Juju separate with different interests and different responsibilities, so now the Chef guys are happy to use MAAS, which is good for us both. What can you tell me about the future of Juju? Things I'm interested in: - Big companies building services on top of Juju Pretty
Re: What's the future of Juju?
Hi, Thanks for the useful feedback on docs! I agree that good examples for Python and the charm helpers are things that are sorely missing, and we will address that soon. I don't want to burden you further, but would you mind if I emailed you some questions about your experience with the documentation? I don't like to pass up the opportunity to talk to real users! In the meantime if you have any more suggestions for docs, please feel free to email me or you can report specific issues on the docs repository (https://github.com/juju/docs/issues). -- Nick Veitch, Documentation Team nick.vei...@canonical.com -- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
Re: What's the future of Juju?
On 25/03/15 20:01, Merlijn Sebrechts wrote: 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. Yes, agreed! 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 understand what you mean. In part I think this comes from the team being focused on getting to our key Juju 2.0 milestone, and perhaps not taking as much time to celebrate the smaller milestones on the way, especially when they are things that we know need a little more work. For example, the Windows and CentOS support that has landed is a huge step, but we know it is still a bit rough and needs more polish. Perhaps we should be louder about some of those steps to draw in people who could help provide feedback and patches! 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... No chance of that. In my travels now I am glad to say I see a shift in the way people engage with us about Juju. It used to be why would you want to compete with Puppet? but now folks understand that we do not want to compete with Puppet, we want to come up a level and enable people to collaborate and reuse their puppet / chef / bash / python across different clouds and environments. That focus on collaboration and reuse is what makes Juju special. In the long run we will integrate Juju into places like HEAT so you get the benefit of charms, together with the underlying cloud information about performance, so that things like autoscaling are magical, but in the short term it's easy to think the projects compete. But folks are starting to understand that now, so I don't get asked why do you not just do HEAT?. I also think that it will emerge that there are many levels of orchestration; Juju will be the BEST for the lowest level of infrastructure orchestration, but people will use Juju to deploy things like PAAS which themselves offer a kind of orchestration. So end-users might use a PAAS, which is like a model or API or orchestration system, and underneath that, administrators will use Juju for the base level. We won't try to push Juju into every layer; just like we have kept MAAS and Juju separate with different interests and different responsibilities, so now the Chef guys are happy to use MAAS, which is good for us both. What can you tell me about the future of Juju? Things I'm interested in: - Big companies building services on top of Juju Pretty much the biggest telco's in the world, and many of the companies that supply them, are writing charms. Pretty much the biggest investment banks in the world, are writing charms. Pretty much the biggest media companies in the world, are writing charms. Pretty much the biggest big data and machine learning companies, are writing charms. Now, of course, those companies also do a lot of OTHER things :) so I can't say they will all move solely to Juju because they naturally will not. But smart folks are seeing what you see - the model is amazing. And if we are able to get the next round of model pieces in place - status, network, disk - then we'll be able to do some really incredible rapid deployment and service evolution things. My biggest concern at the moment is that I think it's too hard to add interfaces to existing charms. I think about adding say a Nagios interface to an existing charm - that should be really easy, but I think we haven't optimised the whole charm development process very well, so I will host the lead charmers at my house next week for a mini sprint so they can show me what I'm missing and we can discuss how to make it much better. Also, I think we need to really socialise the status work, because it's too easy for charms to fail mysteriously, and that makes Juju look bad. So automated testing of charms is going to get even more important. - Statements of long-term commitment from Canonical You heard it from me. I'm personally interested in Juju and it has a future, for sure, under all the scenarios I can influence. I think the cloud world needs something like Juju that is cross-platform and cross-cloud, and I find the project personally challenging and interesting. Looking at the thread, you also
Re: What's the future of Juju?
I second Nate's statement! On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Nate Finch nate.fi...@canonical.com wrote: I wanted to specifically thank you for pointing out the bugs that affect you. It's a huge help in prioritizing what we work on. On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Merlijn Sebrechts merlijn.sebrec...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for your answer! I didn't know Windows and Centos support was coming so soon, great to know! The lacking documentation is the biggest issue to me. The charm-helpers documentation is outdated in a lot of places and that makes it seem as it isn't being actively maintained anymore. Ofcourse, this is a side-effect of a rapidly expanding product... The charm-helpers documentation also lacks some good examples and guidelines. Things like What's the best way to create templates, What's the easiest way to get relation data, ... The documentation shows you how to do it in bash, but is really lacking for python. I had a really hard time trying to decipher how the services framework works exactly. Then again, this is probably also partly due to the fact that I'm still learning my way around python. As for the bugs. I submitted/affects me a few: Critical: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-deployer/+bug/1434458 Medium: https://bugs.launchpad.net/charm-tools/+bug/1433035 https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1415176 https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1429790 https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1316174 Feature request: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1432331 The saltstack charm-helpers integration also has few problems. I just gave up on it and wrote the install hooks in python. 2015-03-25 21:32 GMT+01:00 Nate Finch nate.fi...@canonical.com: I'm a core dev on Juju, I can answer some, but not all of these questions. First off, as far as long term commitment for Juju - Juju is a huge part of Canonical's long term strategy... right up there with the Ubuntu Phone and Ubuntu itself. The Juju team has been expanding hugely in the last couple years... I forget exactly the numbers we're at now, but it's an order of magnitude more people working on Juju than there were just a couple years ago. Juju is used *extensively* internally at Canonical. We have a mandate that all internal services be deployed via Juju. As far as supporting other operating systems, we actually do support Windows, right now (though it can be a little tricky to set up, and generally only works on private clouds, due to licensing restrictions on distributing Windows images). See here: http://www.cloudbase.it/windows-with-juju-and-maas/ (Cloudbase partnered with us to get Juju working with Windows) Cloudbase is also currently tackling CentOS support. It currently works and is just being cleaned up, it should be available for testing in a few weeks. The number of features that have landed in the last year is tremendous - high availability, networking, storage, major improvements in the GUI, support for more clouds (Google Cloud Compute support is coming out with 1.23, which is due any day now), Windows support, backup and restore As for bugs, there are bugs in every product, especially new and rapidly expanding products, like Juju. If there are particular bugs that concern you, we'd be happy to look into them. We try to make sure that we fix anything that is a regression or would majorly hinder usage we do use this internally after all, so believe me, we hear about it when things aren't working well! :) I'm sorry you find the documentation lacking. We have been putting effort into that recently. I, personally, am a big fan of extensive documentation, and I know our documentation is not nearly as extensive as it could be. I can't personally talk about big companies using Juju... I know we have several very large companies doing very large installations, but I don't think anything is public about that. Hopefully someone else can bring up a list of people using Juju. Hope that answers at least some of your questions. 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
RE: What's the future of Juju?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 14:35:23, Mark Ramm-Christensen (Canonical.com) wrote: 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 Metaswitch's engagement with Juju goes beyond the OIL: all of our open source products have Juju charms available, many of which are already in the charm store with more in review. That said, we have had a lot of success working with Juju for OpenStack deployments: on a personal level I've found it the best tool in my toolbox for deploying large OpenStack clusters. We're really happy with where Juju is and where it's going, and we're excited to be a part of that. I think there are a lot of reasons to be optimistic about Juju's future. Cory -- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
Re: What's the future of Juju?
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
Re: What's the future of Juju?
Thanks for your answer! I didn't know Windows and Centos support was coming so soon, great to know! The lacking documentation is the biggest issue to me. The charm-helpers documentation is outdated in a lot of places and that makes it seem as it isn't being actively maintained anymore. Ofcourse, this is a side-effect of a rapidly expanding product... The charm-helpers documentation also lacks some good examples and guidelines. Things like What's the best way to create templates, What's the easiest way to get relation data, ... The documentation shows you how to do it in bash, but is really lacking for python. I had a really hard time trying to decipher how the services framework works exactly. Then again, this is probably also partly due to the fact that I'm still learning my way around python. As for the bugs. I submitted/affects me a few: Critical: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-deployer/+bug/1434458 Medium: https://bugs.launchpad.net/charm-tools/+bug/1433035 https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1415176 https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1429790 https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1316174 Feature request: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1432331 The saltstack charm-helpers integration also has few problems. I just gave up on it and wrote the install hooks in python. 2015-03-25 21:32 GMT+01:00 Nate Finch nate.fi...@canonical.com: I'm a core dev on Juju, I can answer some, but not all of these questions. First off, as far as long term commitment for Juju - Juju is a huge part of Canonical's long term strategy... right up there with the Ubuntu Phone and Ubuntu itself. The Juju team has been expanding hugely in the last couple years... I forget exactly the numbers we're at now, but it's an order of magnitude more people working on Juju than there were just a couple years ago. Juju is used *extensively* internally at Canonical. We have a mandate that all internal services be deployed via Juju. As far as supporting other operating systems, we actually do support Windows, right now (though it can be a little tricky to set up, and generally only works on private clouds, due to licensing restrictions on distributing Windows images). See here: http://www.cloudbase.it/windows-with-juju-and-maas/ (Cloudbase partnered with us to get Juju working with Windows) Cloudbase is also currently tackling CentOS support. It currently works and is just being cleaned up, it should be available for testing in a few weeks. The number of features that have landed in the last year is tremendous - high availability, networking, storage, major improvements in the GUI, support for more clouds (Google Cloud Compute support is coming out with 1.23, which is due any day now), Windows support, backup and restore As for bugs, there are bugs in every product, especially new and rapidly expanding products, like Juju. If there are particular bugs that concern you, we'd be happy to look into them. We try to make sure that we fix anything that is a regression or would majorly hinder usage we do use this internally after all, so believe me, we hear about it when things aren't working well! :) I'm sorry you find the documentation lacking. We have been putting effort into that recently. I, personally, am a big fan of extensive documentation, and I know our documentation is not nearly as extensive as it could be. I can't personally talk about big companies using Juju... I know we have several very large companies doing very large installations, but I don't think anything is public about that. Hopefully someone else can bring up a list of people using Juju. Hope that answers at least some of your questions. 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
Re: What's the future of Juju?
I'm a core dev on Juju, I can answer some, but not all of these questions. First off, as far as long term commitment for Juju - Juju is a huge part of Canonical's long term strategy... right up there with the Ubuntu Phone and Ubuntu itself. The Juju team has been expanding hugely in the last couple years... I forget exactly the numbers we're at now, but it's an order of magnitude more people working on Juju than there were just a couple years ago. Juju is used *extensively* internally at Canonical. We have a mandate that all internal services be deployed via Juju. As far as supporting other operating systems, we actually do support Windows, right now (though it can be a little tricky to set up, and generally only works on private clouds, due to licensing restrictions on distributing Windows images). See here: http://www.cloudbase.it/windows-with-juju-and-maas/ (Cloudbase partnered with us to get Juju working with Windows) Cloudbase is also currently tackling CentOS support. It currently works and is just being cleaned up, it should be available for testing in a few weeks. The number of features that have landed in the last year is tremendous - high availability, networking, storage, major improvements in the GUI, support for more clouds (Google Cloud Compute support is coming out with 1.23, which is due any day now), Windows support, backup and restore As for bugs, there are bugs in every product, especially new and rapidly expanding products, like Juju. If there are particular bugs that concern you, we'd be happy to look into them. We try to make sure that we fix anything that is a regression or would majorly hinder usage we do use this internally after all, so believe me, we hear about it when things aren't working well! :) I'm sorry you find the documentation lacking. We have been putting effort into that recently. I, personally, am a big fan of extensive documentation, and I know our documentation is not nearly as extensive as it could be. I can't personally talk about big companies using Juju... I know we have several very large companies doing very large installations, but I don't think anything is public about that. Hopefully someone else can bring up a list of people using Juju. Hope that answers at least some of your questions. 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
Re: What's the future of Juju?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Merlijn Sebrechts merlijn.sebrec...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for your answer! I didn't know Windows and Centos support was coming so soon, great to know! The lacking documentation is the biggest issue to me. The charm-helpers documentation is outdated in a lot of places and that makes it seem as it isn't being actively maintained anymore. Ofcourse, this is a side-effect of a rapidly expanding product... The charm-helpers documentation also lacks some good examples and guidelines. Things like What's the best way to create templates, What's the easiest way to get relation data, ... The documentation shows you how to do it in bash, but is really lacking for python. I had a really hard time trying to decipher how the services framework works exactly. The services framework is quite new... I've not yet had the chance to use it yet either. The saltstack charm-helpers integration also has few problems. I just gave up on it and wrote the install hooks in python. ... and yes, I'll try to get some time to reevaluate the saltstack charm-helpers intergration and see whether it should be fixed or removed. We (the team I work in) used it initially for some charms, but then migrated quite soon to use the ansible support which we're using now, but the next time we write a new charm, we'll evaluate the services framework instead. So the issue with the salt support may be that there are no charms (that I'm aware of) using it and so it is not being integration-tested regularly (though I'm keen to check). I'd recommend exactly what you're doing - starting your charm in plain python. As you develop the charm, you may start to understand the need for, and use the services framework (or other charm-helper-provided support). Cheers, -Michael 2015-03-25 21:32 GMT+01:00 Nate Finch nate.fi...@canonical.com: I'm a core dev on Juju, I can answer some, but not all of these questions. First off, as far as long term commitment for Juju - Juju is a huge part of Canonical's long term strategy... right up there with the Ubuntu Phone and Ubuntu itself. The Juju team has been expanding hugely in the last couple years... I forget exactly the numbers we're at now, but it's an order of magnitude more people working on Juju than there were just a couple years ago. Juju is used extensively internally at Canonical. We have a mandate that all internal services be deployed via Juju. As far as supporting other operating systems, we actually do support Windows, right now (though it can be a little tricky to set up, and generally only works on private clouds, due to licensing restrictions on distributing Windows images). See here: http://www.cloudbase.it/windows-with-juju-and-maas/ (Cloudbase partnered with us to get Juju working with Windows) Cloudbase is also currently tackling CentOS support. It currently works and is just being cleaned up, it should be available for testing in a few weeks. The number of features that have landed in the last year is tremendous - high availability, networking, storage, major improvements in the GUI, support for more clouds (Google Cloud Compute support is coming out with 1.23, which is due any day now), Windows support, backup and restore As for bugs, there are bugs in every product, especially new and rapidly expanding products, like Juju. If there are particular bugs that concern you, we'd be happy to look into them. We try to make sure that we fix anything that is a regression or would majorly hinder usage we do use this internally after all, so believe me, we hear about it when things aren't working well! :) I'm sorry you find the documentation lacking. We have been putting effort into that recently. I, personally, am a big fan of extensive documentation, and I know our documentation is not nearly as extensive as it could be. I can't personally talk about big companies using Juju... I know we have several very large companies doing very large installations, but I don't think anything is public about that. Hopefully someone else can bring up a list of people using Juju. Hope that answers at least some of your questions. 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
