API compatibility policy and practices between juju versions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 John Arbash Meinel wrote: > I think that is one of the primary caveats for the "we don't > guarantee all cross version compatibility" is that we *do* > guarantee upgrade works. I think we should also support "status", so that 1. You can determine whe

Re: Synchronous Bootstrap

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 13-12-03 07:06 AM, Nate Finch wrote: > It seems going from asynchronous to synchronous is highly unlikely > to break anything. It might slow things down a little, if you > were counting on being able to get some stuff done while it runs, > but it s

Re: SSH keys

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 13-12-04 11:15 PM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: > So, synchronous bootstrap broke CI. The reason for this is that > we're now using SSH as part of the process; I can see in the CI > logs that a non-default identity file is being used with "juju > scp". Tha

Re: Dealing with bugs that are only in trunk.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 13-12-12 01:09 PM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote: > I think the number of open critical and high bugs is inflated. The > open critical bugs are an incentive to release soon, but many of > the critical bugs were really closed the moment trunk merged

Re: Initial ssh key management functionality in trunk

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 13-12-13 03:55 AM, Ian Booth wrote: > I'm guessing people will mostly use import to pull in ssh keys from > Launchpad or Github eg "juju authorised-keys import lp:wallyworld". > But for clouds which do not have access to the internet, "add" is > use

Re: juju 1.17.0 + mysql / HP > 2G

Huh. I found that mysql refused to run if it didn't have more than a gig of memory. I think this was when I was running it under lxc on a 2gb instance. This was a few weeks ago, so details are hazy. David Cheney wrote: >HI Curtis, > >I had a similar thought, but wasn't able to validate that as

Re: Avoiding my $2000 AWS bill

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-01-08 03:25 PM, Nate Finch wrote: > It turns out there's a really easy way to avoid this: set up a > billing alert in AWS to email you if your estimated monthly bill > goes over a certain amount for a long enough time. Note that this is a per-re

Re: Local provider - isolating sudo usage

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-01-22 06:12 PM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: > I would like to also prevent Juju from allowing the user to run > with sudo from the outside. This will allow us to remove all of the > code pathways that change ownership to the sudo caller, and avoid > f

Re: lxc bug blocks 1.17.1 release.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-01-27 09:24 AM, Diogo Matsubara wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Aaron Bentley > mailto:aaron.bent...@canonical.com>> > wrote: > > On 14-01-27 08:29 AM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote: >>

Re: lxc bug blocks 1.17.1 release.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-01-27 08:29 AM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote: > Juju 1.16.5 is run with sudo, juju 1.17.* is not. > >> juju --debug bootstrap -e local --constraints mem=2G 2>&1 | tee >> bootstrap.log > > ^ All tests are run as jenkins. When I manually ran this

Re: Two new bugs blocking CI

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-02-19 09:37 PM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: > Glad to see that manual is now in CI. Well... almost. I am working to put manual into CI but was blocked by this bug. I'll look into the upload-tools workaround today. Aaron -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE

Re: manual bootstrap in 1.18

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-03-03 11:54 AM, William Reade wrote: > We've been talking about what we need to do to finalise 1.18, and > the issue with manual bootstrap addresses in environments.yaml [0] > has been causing us some problems; in particular, we think it was a >

Re: What happened to pinned bootstrap

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-03-30 03:23 AM, John Meinel wrote: > I thought at one point we were explicitly requiring that we > bootstrap exact versions of tools (so juju CLI 1.17.2 would only > bootstrap a 1.17.2 set of tools). We at least did 1.17 will only > bootstrap 1.1

Re: [Canonical-juju-qa] Cursed (final): #1173 lp:juju-core r2511 (manual-deploy)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-03-31 10:13 AM, Matt Bruzek wrote: > Did the level of Apache change recently on precise? I saw a > problem with web based charms on the power system because the > version of apache2 changed on trusty and web pages were not enabled > properly. T

Re: [Canonical-juju-qa] Cursed (final): #1173 lp:juju-core r2511 (manual-deploy)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-03-31 01:07 PM, Martin Packman wrote: > Looking at the diff of r2511 I'm pretty doubtful it broke > deploying wordpress. It changes one function only used in tests, > and the tests that use it, to use a different way of specifying the > parameter

Re: Fwd: [Canonical-juju-qa] Cursed (final): #1173 lp:juju-core r2511 (manual-deploy)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-03-31 08:47 AM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote: > The tests show that the wordpress charm failed to present a web > page. Juju status reports there was nothing wrong with juju or the > charm. We have no logs for the failure. > > Aaron will capture

Re: CI hates juju, maybe the feelings are mutual

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-10 05:41 AM, John Meinel wrote: > Well you used to be able to request a downgrade, but it never > actually worked... :)o Could you explain that further? We've done thousands of downgrades and juju reported that it had switched the agent to t

Re: CI hates juju, maybe the feelings are mutual

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-10 08:23 AM, John Meinel wrote: > Note that copying off the all-machines log seems to be broken, the > lines: > > juju --show-log scp -e test-release-aws -- -o > 'StrictHostKeyChecking no' -o 'UserKnownHostsFile /dev/null' -i > /var/lib/jenki

Re: CI hates juju, maybe the feelings are mutual

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-10 02:19 PM, John Meinel wrote: > So Juju would certainly let you run an older binary, and it would, > indeed, switch to that binary. Phew! > I would be ok with allowing downgrades within a PATCH level, but I > think it still holds true tha

Re: What happened to pinned bootstrap

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-17 06:34 AM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: >> Bootstrap will continue to set agent-version to the most recent >> matching major.minor, so the machine agent will immediately >> upgrade to that when it comes online. I don't understand this-- I don't kn

Re: What happened to pinned bootstrap

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-17 08:40 AM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: >> Okay. It's possible to do what you want too (see below), but I >> don't think it's sensible to make that the default behaviour. I think that using a tested combination of client and agent is the most sens

Re: What happened to pinned bootstrap

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-17 11:48 AM, John Meinel wrote: > FWIW that isn't what you get if you do "apt-get install foo" That is fine *if* you do apt-get install foo. But the user isn't doing apt-get install juju-core. They're just doing juju bootstrap. They should

Re: What happened to pinned bootstrap

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-17 12:03 PM, John Meinel wrote: > If you bootstrap, you are installing juju onto the remotel machine. > The reason we created a *patched* version is to give you > improvements (bug fixes, security fixes, etc). Sure, but if the user doesn't

Re: What happened to pinned bootstrap

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-18 06:28 AM, William Reade wrote: > As for automatically upgrading: it's clearly apparent that there's > a compelling case for not *always* doing so. But the bulk of patch > releases *will* be server-side bug fixes, and it's not great if we

Re: lp:juju-core/trunk r2644 broke 1.19.1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-18 02:04 PM, John Meinel wrote: > I did eventually manage to run the CI tests, though there are some > oddities: Sorry about that. The top-level 'upgrade-job' and 'deploy-job' scripts were never meant to run locally. Originally, we entered

Re: What happened to pinned bootstrap

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-04-18 11:53 AM, Kapil Thangavelu wrote: > I think that users should upgrade their clients in order to get > bug fixes. I think that users who don't upgrade their client are > expecting to get a lock-down experience, bugs and all. > > >> And h

Re: Heads up: migrating juju-core to github

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-05-26 06:23 AM, Ian Booth wrote: > Most impacted will be the CI guys who also package the Juju > releases. Curtis, will you be able to accommodate the timing of > this change? Curtis is out today (US holiday), and I can't really say whether we

Re: Possible CI affecting change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-05-27 02:55 AM, John Meinel wrote: > I just proposed this branch: > http://code.launchpad.net/~jameinel/juju-core/login-returns-env-tag/+merge/221021 > > This will make it so that we end up caching the environment UUID > into our ENV.jenv file,

Re: Proposed new charm store API

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thanks. One thing juju-reports needs is a list of all the charms. I think the API spec doesn't include that. Aaron On 14-07-07 05:14 AM, roger peppe wrote: > Francesco Banconi and I have produced a possible specification for > the new charm store A

Re: Proposed new charm store API

? stats/counter/archive-upload:*?list=1&by=week ? Aaron On 14-07-07 11:04 AM, Aaron Bentley wrote: > Thanks. One thing juju-reports needs is a list of all the charms. > I think the API spec doesn't include that. > > Aaron > > On 14-07-07 05:14 AM, roger peppe wrote:

Re: Proposed new charm store API

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-07-09 11:16 AM, roger peppe wrote: > If we need to provide backward compatibility, we could do that in a > separate name space without changing the proposed API. The existing charm-events endpoint requires a revision-id, so it will not work when

Fwd: [Canonical-juju-qa] Cursed: #1583 gitbranch:master:github.com/juju/juju fa76c995 (build-revision)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 It appears that either fa76c995 or d668b6e0 broke the build, and my money's on fa76c995 because it's about extracting state/txn. Aaron - Original Message Subject: [Canonical-juju-qa] Cursed: #1583 gitbranch:master:github.com/juju/j

Re: Devel is broken, we cannot release

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-07-14 11:38 PM, Ian Booth wrote: >> I propose a change in policy. When a there is a regression in CI, >> no new branches can be merged except those that link to the >> blocking bug. This will encourage engineers to fix the >> regression. One way

Re: Devel is broken, we cannot release

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-07-14 11:42 PM, David Cheney wrote: > Who is 'we' ? > > Is some automated process going to manage this moratorium ? Do we > switch off the bot, or perturb it's access ? No, we don't want to switch off the bot, we want to limit the kinds of bra

Re: Devel is broken, we cannot release

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-07-14 11:48 PM, Ian Booth wrote: >> >> * FAIL: managedstorage_test trusty ppc64 from 2014-06-30 which >> had a secondary bug that broke compilation. >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1336089 >> > > This bug brings up another issue.

Re: Charm store API proposal, new version

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-07-15 10:17 AM, roger peppe wrote: > The most significant change is that all endpoints refer just to a > single charm or bundle, rather than being "bulk" calls as they were > before. That sounds like the opposite of what juju-reports wants. Doe

Re: Charm store API proposal, new version

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-07-15 11:43 AM, Richard Harding wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Aaron Bentley wrote: > >> On 14-07-15 10:17 AM, roger peppe wrote: >>> The most significant change is that all endpoints refer just >>> to a single char

Re: Charm store API proposal, new version

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-07-15 06:05 PM, Richard Harding wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Aaron Bentley wrote: > What we lack is your specific use cases as no one working on the > spec is knowledgeable about how you're using the api. I'm happy to

Re: Charm store API proposal, new version

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-07-16 03:00 AM, roger peppe wrote: > On 15 July 2014 21:07, Aaron Bentley > wrote: FWIW, it would be easy to provide a bulk endpoint for > charm/bundle metadata in addition to the existing path-based > calls. > > We could

Re: getting rid of all-machines.log

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-06 10:11 AM, Nate Finch wrote: > all-machines.log seems both redundant and a ticking time bomb of > disk space usage. Do we really need it? Can we drop it and maybe > later schedule some time to use something like logstash that is > both mor

Re: Reproducing Jenkins

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-05 02:24 PM, Jorge Niedbalski wrote: > I am working in to reproduce some of the CI Jenkins jobs on my > local Jenkins installation, but sometimes is a bit hard to > replicate the exact job configuration. > > I am wondering if someone else is

Re: First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-15 04:36 PM, Nate Finch wrote: > There's new hook in town: default-hook. If it exists and a hook > gets called that doesn't have a corresponding hook file, > default-hook gets called with the name of the original hook as its > first argument

Re: Juju stable 1.20.5 is released.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Woo-hoo! Looking forward to these stability improvements. Aaron On 14-08-18 04:09 PM, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote: > juju-core 1.20.5 > > A new stable release of Juju, juju-core 1.20.5, is now available. > This release replaces 1.20.1. > > > Ge

Re: First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-19 09:42 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote: > I have never seen myself a single charm that completely ignores > all the action cues to simply re-read the whole state from the > ground up, The cs:~juju-qa/precise/juju-reports charm follows this gener

Re: First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-19 10:36 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Aaron Bentley > wrote: >> On 14-08-19 09:42 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote: >>> I have never seen myself a single charm that completely >>>

Re: First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-19 11:41 AM, William Reade wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Aaron Bentley > mailto:aaron.bent...@canonical.com>> > wrote: > > reverseproxy-relation-joined start stop > > > (out of interest,

Re: First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-19 11:41 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Aaron Bentley > wrote: > At the same time, the strictness of redoing everything all the time > is not necessary, and a good example is still that > w

Re: First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-19 12:46 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Aaron Bentley > wrote: >> True. At that point, the pattern is not a win, but it's not much >> of a loss. Changing the web site relatio

Re: First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-08-20 10:50 AM, Nate Finch wrote: > If the special hook file is called "default-hook", it makes those > single-script charms seem like less of a hack than if the single > file is called "missing-hook". It would also makes more sense to a > new c

Juju stable 1.20.6 is released.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 juju-core 1.20.6 A new stable release of Juju, juju-core 1.20.6, is now available. This release replaces 1.20.5. juju-core 1.20.6 is available for utopic and backported to earlier series in the following PPA: https://launchpad.net/~juju/+archive

Juju stable 1.20.7 is released.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 juju-core 1.20.7 A new stable release of Juju, juju-core 1.20.7, is now available. This release replaces 1.20.6. juju-core 1.20.7 is available for utopic and backported to earlier series in the following PPA: https://launchpad.net/~juju/+archive

Re: Juju Actions - Use Cases

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-09-10 02:56 AM, Charles Butler wrote: > o as an interesting aside, we are kind of brute forcing this with > config... which it really appears that an action would be better > suited to this task for things like, say, CI We would never use acti

Re: Juju Actions - Use Cases

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-09-10 01:29 PM, Charles Butler wrote: > There's nothing that says the hook cannot call config to make it > reproduce-able But if it's a config variable, then config-changed needs to be able to handle changes to it. If config-changed can handle

New regression: set-env no longer accepts empty values

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I have discovered a regression in juju set-env. I have filed a bug accordingly: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1388073 A recent change to juju broke set-env, so that it no longer accepts empty values. In old versions this worked: juju -

supplement open--port/close-port with ensure-these-and-only-these-ports?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, I take a stateful approach to writing charms. That is, my charms determine what the target state is, then take whatever actions are needed to get the unit into that state, paying as little attention to the current state as is possible. open-

Re: supplement open--port/close-port with ensure-these-and-only-these-ports?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-11-01 12:58 PM, John Meinel wrote: > I believe there is already "opened-ports" to tell you what ports > Juju is currently tracking. Kapil says that's in 1.21 and I was using released juju, so I didn't see that. Cool. For stateful charms,

Re: m1.small rapidly becoming a scarce commodity

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-11-20 02:49 PM, Nate Finch wrote: > We need to change the ec2 provider to request something else > instead Isn't Juju 1.21 switching to SSD instances? https://launchpad.net/juju-core/+milestone/1.21-alpha2 Aaron -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Trivial bugs hurting progress

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-03-04 08:53 AM, Dimiter Naydenov wrote: > If it's about catching map ordering issues, let's use go 1.3+ as > an extra step, rather than gccgo, which is buggy and slow and > randomly segfaults. It's likely we'll slow down merge gating > conside

Re: Testing on windows

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-03-19 06:07 AM, Michael Foord wrote: > Do all tests pass (or skip) on Windows now? Do we have a CI job > running them? We do have a job. It does not gate merges. http://juju-ci.vapour.ws/job/run-unit-tests-win2012-amd64 Aaron -BEGIN PGP

Juju devel 1.23-beta1 is released

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 # juju-core 1.23-beta1 A new development release of Juju, juju-core 1.23-beta1, is now available. This release replaces 1.22.0. ## Upgrades from 1.22 are broken As seen in Lp 1434680 1.22.0 environments cannot upgrade to 1.23-beta1. Upgrading envir

Re: Juju devel 1.23-beta1 is released

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Correction: The PPA URL should be https://launchpad.net/~juju/+archive/devel not https://launchpad.net/~juju/+archive/development Sorry about any confusion. Aaron On 2015-03-23 03:27 PM, Aaron Bentley wrote: > # juju-core 1.23-beta1 > &

juju 1.22.1 is proposed for release

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 # juju-core 1.22.1 A new proposed stable release of Juju, juju-core 1.22.1, is now available. This release may replace 1.22.0 on Wednesday April 8. This is not an April Fool's joke. ## Getting Juju juju-core 1.22.1 is available for utopic and back

Juju stable 1.22.1 is released

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 # juju-core 1.22.1 A new stable release of Juju, juju-core 1.22.1, is now available. This release replaces 1.22.0. ## Getting Juju juju-core 1.22.1 is available for vivid and backported to earlier series in the following PPA: https://launchpad

Re: Feature flag for a provider?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-04-22 09:00 AM, Wayne Witzel wrote: > I've been told to place cloudsigma provider behind a feature flag, > but the result of that is that the provider is not registered > unless the env variable for cloudsigma is set. > > So after wrapping the

Re: Need advice on my juju plugin

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > Any insight on what I'm missing is appreciated. Another note is I'm > not quite sure if there is an alternative to getting the current > running environment other than doing a `juju switch local` then > running the plugin pulling in envcmd.GetDefault

Re: Feature flag for a provider?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-04-23 12:27 AM, John Meinel wrote: > Thinking it through a bit more, I wonder if that is the best > option. Because if someone is already bootstrapped on CloudSigma > you really don't have any reason for it to not support CloudSigma. > It is ju

Re: previously valid amazon environment now invalid?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-04-27 05:30 PM, roger peppe wrote: > That fallback code was designed to be around for only a short time > - I'd suggest removing it. We have bugs about the fact that the fallback code has been removed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bu

Re: previously valid amazon environment now invalid?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-04-28 11:42 AM, roger peppe wrote: > The .jenv code was introduced prior to 1.16. How far back in time > do we need to preserve compatibility? (genuine question) We need to support every mode of operation that 1.18 supported. Juju has a spe

Re: previously valid amazon environment now invalid?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-04-29 04:10 AM, roger peppe wrote: > On 28 April 2015 at 19:32, Aaron Bentley > wrote: >> On 2015-04-28 11:42 AM, roger peppe wrote: >>> The .jenv code was introduced prior to 1.16. How far back in >>&g

Re: previously valid amazon environment now invalid?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-04-29 09:41 AM, Nate Finch wrote: > I think you're missing roger's point. No, I understand his point, and I think that his extrapolation is incorrect, and I explained how. > 1.18 has some fallback code to support 1.16. However, we don't > su

Re: previously valid amazon environment now invalid?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-04-29 10:43 AM, roger peppe wrote: >> Once Trusty EOLs, then I think we would be able to drop >> functionality that 1.18 itself used only for migration. >> >> For example, if juju 1.18 had automatically created .jenvs from >> the environments.

Re: previously valid amazon environment now invalid?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-04-29 12:31 PM, roger peppe wrote: > FWIW I seem to remember some command line flags being deprecated > (with a visible warning message) and then removed. I wonder if that > might be another possible approach that could let us avoid > unbounde

Re: Running CI tests locally.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-05-19 09:47 PM, Jesse Meek wrote: > Hi All, > > tl;dr bash script to run CI deploy job locally: > https://github.com/waigani/juju-scripts/blob/master/ci.sh Cool. > ci.sh currently only runs the deploy job (bootstrap, deploy two > services,

Re: Rule #2 should die

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-06-04 05:42 PM, Martin Packman wrote: > Currently juju-reports has a rule matching on failures where our > CI harness interrupted the test because it took too long: > > > > This seems too generic a

Re: Rule #2 should die

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-06-04 11:41 PM, John Meinel wrote: > Could it just be a lower priority catch-all rule and have the > other rules evaluated first? It does seem useful to have a backstop > against bad behavior when we introduce a new failure method that > didn't

Re: I'm concerned

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-06-18 12:12 AM, Tim Penhey wrote: > The certupdater worker was making the mistake of trusting a > watcher. It was blindly getting the addresses and updating the > certificate. Is this relevant? https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1466514

Re: Blocking bugs process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-07-09 06:33 PM, Martin Packman wrote: > == Unblocking == > > * All bugs tagged "ci blocker" will be marked fix-released when > the branch has a blessed tip. * QA will mark all other blockers > fix-released when they determine them to be fixed.

Re: Blocking bugs process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-07-13 07:43 PM, Ian Booth wrote: > By the definition given > > "If a bug must be fixed for the next minor release, it is > considered a ‘blocker’ and will prevent all landing on that > branch." > > that bug and any other that we say we must i

Re: Blocking bugs process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2015-07-14 10:02 AM, Nate Finch wrote: > I agree that if a blocker is found in an earlier minor version, > that upgrading to a new minor version with the same blocker doesn't > make anyone any worse off. I think of this argument as "No use closing

DRAFT 1.25 is branched

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 We created the 1.25 branch based on master a8ee96a https://github.com/juju/juju/commits/1.25 Make fixes to the 1.25 branch and forward port them to master. If the bug only has a single bug task in the affected table, you need to add the 1.25 ser

Will Cloudsigma be fully supported?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, I notice that cloudsigma is still behind a feature flag in master, as of revision-build 3024. So far, it has been feature-flagged in both 1.24 and 1.25. Is there a plan to promote it to fully-supported, without the need for a flag? Aaron

Re: Will Cloudsigma be fully supported?

t; drop the feature flag without impacting others. > > Thoughts? > > John =:-> > > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Aaron Bentley > mailto:aaron.bent...@canonical.com>> > wrote: > > Hi all, > > I notice that cloudsigma is still behind a feature flag

Juju stable 1.24.6 is released

93444 * Cannot remove an environment user with upper case characters Lp 1467037 Finally We encourage everyone to subscribe the mailing list at juju-...@lists.canonical.com, or join us on #juju-dev on freenode. Aaron Bentley -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Gnu

Juju 1.25-beta1 is released

inally We encourage everyone to subscribe the mailing list at juju-...@lists.canonical.com, or join us on #juju-dev on freenode. Aaron Bentley -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev

Re: Making logging to MongoDB the default

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 > The main issue I can see is that once rsyslog based logging is > turned off we lose the all-machines.log file which some people and > systems no doubt rely on. The logs for an environment can of course > still be retrieved using the "juju debug-log

Re: New feature for 1.26 (master), $(JUJU_HOME)/aliases

bzr has a similar feature, but the problem with such a feature is that it can break scripts that expect the normal behaviour. That's why bzr provides a --no-aliases option, which all scripts calling bzr should use. The same applies to Juju. If "status" gets defaulted to "status --format=tabular"

Re: New feature for 1.26 (master), $(JUJU_HOME)/aliases

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Thank you! Aaron On 2015-10-26 09:22 PM, Tim Penhey wrote: > On 24/10/15 04:05, Aaron Bentley wrote: >> bzr has a similar feature, but the problem with such a feature is >> that it can break scripts that expect the normal behaviour

Re: use --upload-tools when bootstrapping the LXD provider

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 That may be true, but the LXD provider branch has a stale version number. Once the version number is updated to 1.26-alpha2, I imagine the lxd provider will no longer try to use the released streams. The stale version number is also causing builds

Re: Upgrading minimum Go version?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-11-26 04:31 PM, David Cheney wrote: > Martin: Can you setup a unit test job that uses Go 1.5 ? I will > apply the same process I did for the -race job, to get the build > voting, then reenable the tests that were skipped. We already have one

Juju devel 1.26-alpha2 is available for testing

# juju-core 1.26-alpha2 A new development release of Juju, juju-core 1.26-alpha2, is now available. This release replaces version 1.26-alpha1. ## Getting Juju juju-core 1.26-alpha2 is available for Wily and backported to earlier series in the following PPA: https://launchpad.net/~juju/+arc

Re: Juju devel 1.26-alpha2 is available for testing

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-11-27 11:00 AM, Marco Ceppi wrote: > - Running Wily (LXD is installed by default) > > > For the LXD provider, I have the latest LXD installed on trusty, > will that work or is it hard-coded to wily+ ? It will not work. Only platforms with

Re: Juju devel 1.26-alpha2 is available for testing

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-11-27 11:10 AM, Marco Ceppi wrote: > Okay, but I've added the LXD daily/stable PPA which installed `go > version go1.5.1 linux/amd64`. My question is, are the LXD features > locked to an Ubuntu release or is it dependent on checking > platf

Re: Upgrading minimum Go version?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-11-30 10:36 AM, John Meinel wrote: > Given how often people still use "--upload-tools" for things like > private clouds (and is definitely the one used for local provider), > I'd really worry about having a jujud on your local machine that >

Re: Automatic retries of hooks

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-01-20 10:30 AM, Gabriel Samfira wrote: > The auto-retry thing was created to overcome situations in which > the machine is rebooted, or chashes during a hook run > (independently of juju). In this case, the charm would not be able > to recov

Re: Introducing, juju resources!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-02-12 04:26 PM, Katherine Cox-Buday wrote: > Moonstone have been working hard on a new feature coming up in Juju > 2.0 called "Juju Resources", and we're now at a point where we can > share the goodness and call for bugs/feedback! I'm glad t

Re: Introducing, juju resources!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-02-13 09:10 AM, Rick Harding wrote: > Your read is correct. You must declare the resources. It's helpful > to users to know what to stick in there and for the charm to be > able to handle different items. In your case, a single tar file of >

Re: Introducing, juju resources!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-02-14 01:40 PM, Rick Harding wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 12:50 PM Aaron Bentley Yes, you can work > around this with tarfiles, but why do we want to? It's a pain to > build a tar file every time a single depen

Re: Go 1.6 is now in trusty-proposed

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-03-28 09:03 AM, Katherine Cox-Buday wrote: > Generally +1 on this, but I'm also intrigued by Martin's > statistic... do we currently weight test failures by how likely > they are to fail (i.e. how likely they are flaky)? That seems like > it

Re: Unable to kill-controller

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-04-06 08:22 AM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: > What I would like to see is: * destroy-controller to take on a > --force flag, causing it to do what kill-controller does now, and > what destroy-environment --force used to do What kill-controller doe

Re: Unable to kill-controller

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-04-06 10:45 AM, Nate Finch wrote: > Wait, didn't destroy-environment --force fall back to the provider? > I thought that was the whole point of --force No, it didn't fall back. It uses the provider unconditionally, without trying a normal d

  1   2   >