Re: Should 'juju status' always include a timestamp

2018-04-18 Thread Jason Hobbs 
Yes, a timestamp is always appropriate.

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 3:12 AM, Merlijn Sebrechts
 wrote:
> +1
>
> Op wo 18 apr. 2018 om 09:19 schreef John A Meinel
> :
>>
>> I was just going over a list of pastes from James Beedy on this bug:
>>   https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1763963
>>
>> And I realized that something that would be really nice is to just have
>> some sort of timestamp so you could see how much time elapsed between each
>> "juju status". And given the use of 'juju status' it seems like something
>> that would generally be useful. (sharing a snapshot with someone else would
>> always be done with the context of *when* you ran that status, so you could
>> correlate it with other information like load metrics, etc.)
>>
>> Thoughts? It seems easy enough to add, but do people feel that it
>> does/doesn't belong?
>>
>> John
>> =:->
>>
>> --
>> 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: Juju 2.2-rc2 has been released

2017-06-12 Thread Jason Hobbs 
Nicholas,

Thanks.  beta is still 2.2rc1.  Should it be 2.2rc2 also?

Jason

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Nicholas Skaggs <
nicholas.ska...@canonical.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the heads-up Jason. Yes, small snafu with publishing the
> builds. Edge builds are tracking develop (2.3-alpha1) and now are being
> published again.
>
> Nicholas
>
> On 06/12/2017 11:18 AM, Jason Hobbs wrote:
>
>> I noticed that for the juju snap, edge and beta channels have older
>> releases than candidate.  Shouldn't they always be at least the same
>> version as candidate, if not newer?
>>
>>   stable:2.1.3   (1922) 24MB classic
>>   candidate: 2.2-rc2 (1929) 25MB classic
>>   beta:  2.2-rc1 (1925) 25MB classic
>>   edge:  2.2-rc1+develop-7256fe0 (1915) 44MB classic
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jason
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:25 AM, Chris Lee <chris@canonical.com
>> <mailto:chris@canonical.com>> wrote:
>>
>> # Juju 2.2-rc2 Release Notes
>>
>> We are delighted to announce the release of Juju and conjure-up
>> 2.2-rc2! In this release, Juju greatly improves memory and storage
>> consumption, works on KVM containers, and improves network
>> modelling. conjure-up now supports Juju as a Service (JAAS),
>> provides a MacOS client, and adds support for repeatable spell
>> deployments.
>>
>> The best way to get your hands on this release of Juju and
>> conjure-up is to install them via snap packages (see
>> https://snapcraft.io/for more info on snaps).
>>
>>snap install juju --classic --candidate
>>
>> snap install conjure-up --classic --candidate
>>
>> Other packages are available for a variety of platforms. Please
>> see the online documentation at
>> https://jujucharms.com/docs/devel/reference-releases#development
>> <https://jujucharms.com/docs/devel/reference-releases#development>
>>
>> Please note that if you are upgrading an existing controller,
>> please make sure there is at least 6G of free disk space. The
>> upgrade step for the logs can take a while, in the vicinity of 10
>> or more minutes if the current logs collection is at its maximum size.
>>
>> Since 2.2-rc1
>>
>> ## New and Improved
>>
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Better support credential management in the Azure provider
>>
>> * support autoload-credentials and juju add-credential in the
>> azure provider when Azure CLI is installed.
>>
>> (this removes the requirement that the user discover their
>> subscription ID before creating credentials)
>>
>> Rate limit login and connection requests to the controller(s) on
>> busy systems.
>>
>> ## Fixes
>>
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Fix issue where status history logs were not pruned:
>>
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1696491
>> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1696491>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>> <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: Juju 2.2-rc2 has been released

2017-06-12 Thread Jason Hobbs 
I noticed that for the juju snap, edge and beta channels have older
releases than candidate.  Shouldn't they always be at least the same
version as candidate, if not newer?

  stable:2.1.3   (1922) 24MB classic
  candidate: 2.2-rc2 (1929) 25MB classic
  beta:  2.2-rc1 (1925) 25MB classic
  edge:  2.2-rc1+develop-7256fe0 (1915) 44MB classic

Thanks,
Jason

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:25 AM, Chris Lee  wrote:

> # Juju 2.2-rc2 Release Notes
>
>
>
> We are delighted to announce the release of Juju and conjure-up 2.2-rc2!
> In this release, Juju greatly improves memory and storage consumption,
> works on KVM containers, and improves network modelling. conjure-up now
> supports Juju as a Service (JAAS), provides a MacOS client, and adds
> support for repeatable spell deployments.
>
>
>
> The best way to get your hands on this release of Juju and conjure-up is
> to install them via snap packages (see https://snapcraft.io/ for more
> info on snaps).
>
>
>
> snap install juju --classic --candidate
>
> snap install conjure-up --classic --candidate
>
>
>
> Other packages are available for a variety of platforms. Please see the
> online documentation at https://jujucharms.com/docs/
> devel/reference-releases#development
>
>
>
> Please note that if you are upgrading an existing controller, please make
> sure there is at least 6G of free disk space. The upgrade step for the logs
> can take a while, in the vicinity of 10 or more minutes if the current logs
> collection is at its maximum size.
>
>
>
> Since 2.2-rc1
>
>
> ## New and Improved
>
> --
>
>
>
> Better support credential management in the Azure provider
>
> * support autoload-credentials and juju add-credential in the azure
> provider when Azure CLI is installed.
>
> (this removes the requirement that the user discover their subscription ID
> before creating credentials)
>
>
>
> Rate limit login and connection requests to the controller(s) on busy
> systems.
>
>
>
> ## Fixes
>
> --
>
>
>
> Fix issue where status history logs were not pruned:
>
>   https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1696491
>
>
> --
> 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: upcoming change in Juju 2.0 to bootstrap arguments

2016-10-13 Thread Jason Hobbs 
Thanks for the heads up Ian - we will adjust our scripts to accomodate.

Jason

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Ian Booth  wrote:

> See https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1632919
>
> The order of the cloud/region and controller name arguments will be
> swapped.
>
> Old:
>
> $ juju bootstrap mycontroller aws/us-east-1
>
> New:
>
> $ juju bootstrap aws/us-east-1 mycontroller
> or now
> $ juju bootstrap aws/us-east-1
>
> Notice how controller name is optional. It will default to cloud-region.
> eg
>
> $ juju bootstrap aws
> Creating Juju controller "aws-us-east-1" on aws/us-east-1
> ...
>
> The only fallout I expect will be for folks like OIL who use scripts will
> have
> to tweak their scripts to swap the arguments. The bootstrap API itself is
> unaffected so Python client and other API users will see no difference.
> It's
> just a CLI change.
>
>
-- 
Juju-dev mailing list
Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev

Re: juju devel 1.22-beta4 is available for testing.

2015-02-27 Thread Jason Hobbs 
No - I can browse to the sjson file and there is no 1.22-beta4 entry.

It does show up in the .json file though..

Jason

On 02/27/2015 12:34 PM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote:
 Could caching be an issue?
 
 On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Ryan Beisner
 ryan.beis...@canonical.com wrote:
 Ditto, also seeing that.

 On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Jason Hobbs jason.ho...@canonical.com
 wrote:
 ...
 Thanks,https://streams.canonical.com/juju/tools/streams/v1/com.ubuntu.juju:devel:tools.sjson

 or


 https://streams.canonical.com/juju/tools/streams/v1/com.ubuntu.juju-devel-tools.sjson
 
 

 (unsure which one gets used).

 Jason
 
 The index
 https://streams.canonical.com/juju/tools/streams/v1/index2.json
 points devel streams to
 
 http://streams.canonical.com/juju/tools/streams/v1/com.ubuntu.juju-devel-tools.json
 which does contain 28 1.22-beta4 agents which I can also see at
 http://streams.canonical.com/juju/tools/devel/
 
 Index2 was updated on Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:09:44 +
 and the devel product file on Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:09:44 +
 
 ahh. The json was not signed! The signed json is from the previous
 release. We will look into this now. I will reply with an update soon.
 

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