On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:42 PM Marco Ceppi <[email protected]> wrote:
> There are two things that need to be done. The first, we need the reactive > framework to be ported to powershell - that way we can have charms written > in powershell and compiled as such. I know the cloud base folks poked at > that a bit in Gent during the Summit but I haven't heard much from there. > > The second, is two base layers. The first is a powershell base layer so > you get the awesome powerhshell helpers cloudbase has created (like the > python charm helpers). That way native power shell layers can be written. > The second is to create a python-windows base layer, this would be the > basic layer and then the necessary methods to install Python on the windows > machine so that python layers work properly. > > Some of this we can pilot ourselves, (mostly the python-windows layer) - > some of the team is sprinting so I'll add that as a stretch goal. The > powershell native features we'll need help and I admit I've done a terrible > job keeping up with the cloudbase folks who have been invaluable as a > windows + juju resource thus far. > Thanks, Marco. FWIW, I had imagined an MVP just as Stuart described: add the Windows bootstrap scripts (install.ps1|bat|cmd, etc.), which should just need to install Python and then defer to the reactive framework. Going full Powershell support sounds ideal, but not what I'm after. Cheers, Andrew > Marco > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 7:46 AM Rick Harding <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I know that Gabriel and some of the CloudBase folks seemed interested in >> layers and possibly some tooling with powershell. I'm not sure how far that >> went but I thought they were experimenting during the charmer's summit. >> That would help with a charm build on windows, but not for some common code >> between both operating systems. >> >> An interesting thing is how much setup and how ootb the Ubuntu on Windows >> needs. If it's working out of the box, it might be an interesting move for >> us and our tools that Windows users could get a Linux experience. I guess >> that it won't be ideal though as I'm not sure what the server side plans >> around that work is. >> >> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:18 AM Andrew Wilkins < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to write a charm that should be mostly identical on Windows >>> and Linux, so I think it would make sense to have common code in the form >>> of a layer. >>> >>> Is anyone working on getting "charm build", layers, and friends to work >>> with Windows workloads? If not, I may look into it myself. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Andrew >>> -- >>> Juju mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju >>> >> -- >> Juju mailing list >> [email protected] >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju >> >
-- Juju mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
