+1
I think it is best to keep them separate also in light of
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/articles/resource-manager-deployment-model/#considerations-for-virtual-machines
Looks to me ASM and ARM are alternative approaches rather than ARM being
the evolution of ASM.
Thanks
On Fr
I'd also say we can promote azure with the xml api as soon as it is
stable, and start a new provider in labs (say azurecompute-arm?) that
consumes the new API. If it is not only the api that changes, but also
how networking and other stuff is configured, it is likely that the
changes to the provide
+1
let's merge soon https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/197 and
promote azurecompute!
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
ilgro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 11/12/2015 11:18, Andrea Turli wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> currently we are struggling to have a good jclouds-azure
On 11/12/2015 11:18, Andrea Turli wrote:
Hi,
currently we are struggling to have a good jclouds-azurecompute api to be
promoted to jclouds/jclouds.
I've noticed that MS suggests now to use (and/or switch) to ARM (Azure
Resource Manager) and they have marked the previous API (and also the
console
Hi,
currently we are struggling to have a good jclouds-azurecompute api to be
promoted to jclouds/jclouds.
I've noticed that MS suggests now to use (and/or switch) to ARM (Azure
Resource Manager) and they have marked the previous API (and also the
console) with `classic` label.
I don't know if `c
