Man, our system has confusing terminology. :) On Nov 19, 2013 10:13 PM, "Tim Penhey" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 20/11/13 15:10, Nate Finch wrote: > > That seems like the less useful direction for backwards compatibility. > > There's very little barrier to upgrading the client, so maintaining > > backwards compatibility in the server for it seems like a waste. > > > > But I may be missing something. > > What I'm referring to is the api server, and the agents as clients, not > the command line. > > Tim > > > On Nov 19, 2013 8:43 PM, "Tim Penhey" <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > On 20/11/13 12:05, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote: > > > I am not sure if I am leading a discussion or just stating that we > > > have a problem that I don't believe can be ever solved. > > > > > > We abandoned the release of 1.16.4 because we found it was > > > incompatible with 1.16.3 > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1252469 > > > "API incompatability: ERROR no such request "DestroyMachines" > > on Client" > > > > > > I now believe this bug is in the same class of problem: > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1250154 > > > "ERROR no such request "EnvironmentGet" on Client" > > > > It was my understanding that the api server needs to be at least as > > advanced as any client. > > > > This means that a 1.18 server should be able to support a 1.16.x > client. > > > > However we don't support 1.18 clients on a 1.16.x server. > > > > Does this change your thinking? > > > > Tim > > > > -- > > Juju-dev mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > > > >
-- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
