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 registration of the provider in the feature flag (see: https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/0a2cf42dcf051fe43bd803ebb144358723b4af82), the tests no longer pass, since there is no registered provider for cloudsigma. Manually calling s.SetFeatureFlag(feature.CloudSigma) from the Suite and/or Test setup methods doesn't help since by that point the init for each provider has already been run. Looking for suggestions? My thought is that the flag isn't needed since by nature providers are contained and their code is only called if you explicitly use the provider. I think there's a potential quality issue. I don't know anything about the state of the cloud sigma provider code, but since it's being kept behind a feature flag, I have to think a) The code is not yet production quality or b) The API isn't stable. Say you're using Juju 2.5, in which the cloud sigma provider is fully production quality. You create an environment. Then you go to a machine that has Juju 2.4, where the provider was not production-quality, and try to perform an operation on that environment. Does Juju break? Does the environment? Because you weren't paying attention to the Juju version number, you may be surprised by poor behaviour. Instead, it would be better if Juju said: CloudSigma is not production-quality in this version of Juju. To enable it anyway, set JUJU_DEV_FEATURE_FLAGS to $FOO. So to avoid surprising users, I think a feature flag makes sense. Aaron -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVN6FkAAoJEK84cMOcf+9hXR8IAKoenxmb8797B7xaNB842ZkH tlwwvsc/joO8Cy73OPFyNg1NQ14g4FVCUJJ6q0qgj51ubIrB1725a0XwilUYSme5 uQGqEebZx6o9Q1SCP7uxOAZ4SEH7KftjIiqKG7kTzV93ZSeJtyK3Y7K7IuKw18UL VvOdhxrAie/dBnxhx16CqqbJcSj21RqLmd9osgL+gWTPtZ+UkAwV5nDqunAfaqt4 9DeoYloYVeqaFlQoTsyMB0hxd3Z63S+gHcjGWSRfAqdXCOZFjMntdbq8+dOMDMvB FkL0GBKliC7tPio2/w7OF4UW8AGMxQvMGddJflOFFt+CNAGwaLtxf6mHuA9jRGw= =VdEM -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
Feature flag for a provider?
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 registration of the provider in the feature flag (see: https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/0a2cf42dcf051fe43bd803ebb144358723b4af82), the tests no longer pass, since there is no registered provider for cloudsigma. Manually calling s.SetFeatureFlag(feature.CloudSigma) from the Suite and/or Test setup methods doesn't help since by that point the init for each provider has already been run. Looking for suggestions? My thought is that the flag isn't needed since by nature providers are contained and their code is only called if you explicitly use the provider. -- Wayne Witzel III wayne.wit...@canonical.com -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
Juju 1.23.1 is proposed for stable release
# juju-core 1.23.1 A new proposed stable release of Juju, juju-core 1.23.1, is now available. This release may replace version 1.23.0 on Thursday April 23. ## Getting Juju juju-core 1.23.1 is available for vivid and backported to earlier series in the following PPA: https://launchpad.net/~juju/+archive/proposed Windows and OS X users will find installers at: https://launchpad.net/juju-core/+milestone/1.23.1 Proposed releases use the proposed simple-streams. You must configure the `agent-stream` option in your environments.yaml to use the matching juju agents. ## Notable Changes since 1.23.0 ### Experimental: Addressable LXC Containers and KVM Instances on AWS and MAAS The Juju AWS and MAAS providers now support starting LXC containers. The MAAS providers also supports networking on KVM. Containers and Virtual Machines will be given statically allocated private IP addresses from the same subnet as their host machine. For example on MAAS you can now: juju deploy wordpress --to lxc:0 juju add-unit mysql --to kvm:1 This experimental feature can be enabled when the environment is bootstrapped like so: JUJU_DEV_FEATURE_FLAGS=address-allocation juju bootstrap These two units can now talk directly on the private subnet. ## Resolved issues * Addressable containers cannot resolve non-fqdn in maas Lp 1445063 * Vivid bootstrap and destroy-environment intermittently fails Lp 1446662 Finally We encourage everyone to subscribe the mailing list at juju-...@lists.canonical.com, or join us on #juju-dev on freenode. -- Curtis Hovey Canonical Cloud Development and Operations http://launchpad.net/~sinzui -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
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.GetDefaultEnvironment, seen here: `juju switch` (aka `juju env`) will tell you the current environment. Your plugin should accept -e/--environment to override it. I wrote a g+ post about plugins recently: https://plus.google.com/+AaronBentley/posts/45FA3LDkcv8 Aaron -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVN7kcAAoJEK84cMOcf+9h6UoIAKa1o3TMqvbfJgWZUMmkP9EN 5EzFtQ3tOxHWETa2cctoJazR7sXTzYtkgLznmHxmnBaASkWZ9ro0wjOfPzzq7NEL m75c6ypmRraqZ/gQQMrsiVMvTE3djAoVUVB/slJ0zXqAD8tMsQ/DjwWzcPfv5xWX ZWEV9EOnobVaSss7eqsHj7Hc7BZ7QmnrCdX803qj/7Sh1S+sN1650u87j949gfw5 w93mIhdBLTyMjKMhJaybozlMJZ8HFsMGcnnmqstBKulJS3KMLaBEbwlXuU09YBrV zBIdP9DWs6ZBYmRqrD923EVkkB4k+A49RhSt9Syv16ViZyVJA23zPCahFZVSqfc= =tjm2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
gocharm help
Hello, i'm try to investigate gocharm and i'm happy with it. But i'm stuck ad this issues: https://github.com/juju/gocharm/issues/44 can somebody helps me? -- Vasiliy Tolstov, e-mail: v.tols...@selfip.ru jabber: v...@selfip.ru -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
Re: Feature flag for a provider?
So if we want feature flagged providers I think the best option is to change registration code path. Probably my ideal would be to have environs.RegisterFlaggedProvider(name, flag string, p EnvironProvider, alias ...string) and then we can track in environs/config.go that a given provider name is flagged with a given feature flag, and have environs.Provider() check if a given provider is flagged, and only return it if the flag is set. 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 just broken if it isn't working. (Imagine they used a version of juju that didn't have the flag, and upgraded to a version that requires the flag, and suddenly everything just breaks.) What I'd rather see is that only juju bootstrap pays attention to whether this is a supported provider. And everything else just treats it as a fully recognized provider. That might be easiest if we just change CloudSigma.Bootstrap() to check for the flag? Does that work out ok for you? That still lets us install the provider support, if you're using the provider it JustWorks, and we just give you an Error when Bootstrap is called pointing you for how you can enable this provider. John =:- On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Wayne Witzel wayne.wit...@canonical.com wrote: That sounds reasonable to me Aaron. Also Eric just suggested I put the set flag in export_test.go, he did something similar for GCE and it worked, so I will try that. Thanks. On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Aaron Bentley aaron.bent...@canonical.com wrote: -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 registration of the provider in the feature flag (see: https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/0a2cf42dcf051fe43bd803ebb144358723b4af82 ), the tests no longer pass, since there is no registered provider for cloudsigma. Manually calling s.SetFeatureFlag(feature.CloudSigma) from the Suite and/or Test setup methods doesn't help since by that point the init for each provider has already been run. Looking for suggestions? My thought is that the flag isn't needed since by nature providers are contained and their code is only called if you explicitly use the provider. I think there's a potential quality issue. I don't know anything about the state of the cloud sigma provider code, but since it's being kept behind a feature flag, I have to think a) The code is not yet production quality or b) The API isn't stable. Say you're using Juju 2.5, in which the cloud sigma provider is fully production quality. You create an environment. Then you go to a machine that has Juju 2.4, where the provider was not production-quality, and try to perform an operation on that environment. Does Juju break? Does the environment? Because you weren't paying attention to the Juju version number, you may be surprised by poor behaviour. Instead, it would be better if Juju said: CloudSigma is not production-quality in this version of Juju. To enable it anyway, set JUJU_DEV_FEATURE_FLAGS to $FOO. So to avoid surprising users, I think a feature flag makes sense. Aaron -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVN6FkAAoJEK84cMOcf+9hXR8IAKoenxmb8797B7xaNB842ZkH tlwwvsc/joO8Cy73OPFyNg1NQ14g4FVCUJJ6q0qgj51ubIrB1725a0XwilUYSme5 uQGqEebZx6o9Q1SCP7uxOAZ4SEH7KftjIiqKG7kTzV93ZSeJtyK3Y7K7IuKw18UL VvOdhxrAie/dBnxhx16CqqbJcSj21RqLmd9osgL+gWTPtZ+UkAwV5nDqunAfaqt4 9DeoYloYVeqaFlQoTsyMB0hxd3Z63S+gHcjGWSRfAqdXCOZFjMntdbq8+dOMDMvB FkL0GBKliC7tPio2/w7OF4UW8AGMxQvMGddJflOFFt+CNAGwaLtxf6mHuA9jRGw= =VdEM -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev -- Wayne Witzel III wayne.wit...@canonical.com -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
