Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-04-28 Thread Stuart Bishop
On 9 March 2016 at 06:51, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > Hi folks > > We're starting to think about the next development cycle, and gathering > priorities and requests from users of Juju. I'm writing to outline some > current topics and also to invite requests or thoughts on relative

Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-04-02 Thread Stuart Bishop
On 1 April 2016 at 20:50, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > On 19/03/16 01:02, Stuart Bishop wrote: >> On 9 March 2016 at 10:51, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: >> >>> Operational concerns >> I still want 'juju-wait' as a supported, builtin command rather than >> as a fragile

Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-03-30 Thread John Meinel
ator > Liferay, Inc. > Enterprise. Open Source. For life. > > From: Mark Shuttleworth <m...@ubuntu.com> > >> Date: Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 6:52 PM >> Subject: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe) >> To: juju <j...@lists.ubuntu.com>, juju-dev@lists.ubunt

Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-03-20 Thread roger peppe
On 16 March 2016 at 12:31, Kapil Thangavelu wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: >> >> Hi folks >> >> We're starting to think about the next development cycle, and gathering >> priorities and requests from users of Juju. I'm

Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-03-19 Thread Kapil Thangavelu
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > Hi folks > > We're starting to think about the next development cycle, and gathering > priorities and requests from users of Juju. I'm writing to outline some > current topics and also to invite requests or thoughts on

Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-03-18 Thread roger peppe
On 16 March 2016 at 15:04, Kapil Thangavelu wrote: > Relations have associated config schemas that can be set by the user > creating the relation. I.e. I could run one autoscaling service and > associate with relation config for autoscale options to the relation with a > given

Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-03-18 Thread Stuart Bishop
On 9 March 2016 at 10:51, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > Operational concerns I still want 'juju-wait' as a supported, builtin command rather than as a fragile plugin I maintain and as code embedded in Amulet that the ecosystem team maintain. A thoughtless change to Juju's status

Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-03-18 Thread Andrew Wilkins
On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 12:53 AM Jacek Nykis wrote: > On 08/03/16 23:51, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > > *Storage* > > > > * shared filesystems (NFS, GlusterFS, CephFS, LXD bind-mounts) > > * object storage abstraction (probably just mapping to S3-compatible > APIS) > >

Re: Planning for Juju 2.2 (16.10 timeframe)

2016-03-18 Thread Eric Snow
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Tom Barber wrote: > c) upload files with actions. Currently for some things I need to pass in > some files then trigger an action on the unit upon that file. It would be > good to say path=/tmp/myfile.xyz and have the action upload that