On 13/12/14 08:54, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote: > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Kapil Thangavelu > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> first as you say its people first experience with juju and the way its >> deployment usage fits very well with some folks production needs ( ie. i >> have a big machine in the corner and juju can deploy workloads on it). I >> think the issue primarily is that of implementation, and the mindset among >> developers/implementers that we don't support it. >> >> Most of the reasons why its different on an implementation level disappear >> with lxd, at which point we should support it for dev and prod. > > Do you mean local-provider would be less devel/demo if the > state-server was place in a container (machine-0) instead of co-opting > localhost to be machine-0?
Yes, I think it would. People could always add routing rules themselves to particular components. Tim -- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
