Re: Juju 2.0 is here!

I concur. You only have to use 1.25 for a short while again to see how far Juju has come. Be proud of your work, celebrate the release. Go team! Tim On 14/10/16 17:50, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: Congrats everyone, this is a release to be proud of. Multi-user multi-model, great CLI, it's a

Re: Juju 2.0 is here!

Congrats everyone, this is a release to be proud of. Multi-user multi-model, great CLI, it's a joy to train people on it. Well done. Mark On 14/10/16 06:34, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: > Juju 2.0 is here! This release has been a year in the making. We’d > like to thank everyone for their feedback,

Re: Juju 2.0 is here!

WOOT! On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Nicholas Skaggs < nicholas.ska...@canonical.com> wrote: > Juju 2.0 is here! This release has been a year in the making. We’d like to > thank everyone for their feedback, testing, and adoption of juju 2.0 > throughout its development process! Juju brings

Juju 2.0 is here!

Juju 2.0 is here! This release has been a year in the making. We’d like to thank everyone for their feedback, testing, and adoption of juju 2.0 throughout its development process! Juju brings refinements in ease of use, while adding support for new clouds and features. ## New to juju 2?

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

-1, like Menno I was initially quite hopeful for the github reviews. My main concerns are around easily having a list to pull from, and being able to see status, comments on a single dashboard. Tim On 14/10/16 11:44, Menno Smits wrote: We've been trialling Github Reviews for some time now

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

-1 I was really excited by Github Reviews initially but after using it for a while I've switched my position. On 14 October 2016 at 11:44, Menno Smits wrote: > We've been trialling Github Reviews for some time now and it's time to > decide whether we stick with it or

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

-1000 :-) On 14/10/16 08:44, Menno Smits wrote: > We've been trialling Github Reviews for some time now and it's time to > decide whether we stick with it or go back to Reviewboard. > > We're going to have a vote. If you have an opinion on the issue please

Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

We've been trialling Github Reviews for some time now and it's time to decide whether we stick with it or go back to Reviewboard. We're going to have a vote. If you have an opinion on the issue please reply to this email with a +1, 0 or -1, optionally followed by any further thoughts. - +1

Re: upcoming change in Juju 2.0 to bootstrap arguments

Thanks for the heads up Ian - we will adjust our scripts to accomodate. Jason On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Ian Booth wrote: > See https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1632919 > > The order of the cloud/region and controller name arguments will be > swapped. > >

Fwd: Big memory usage improvements

Oops, meant to reply-all. -- Forwarded message - From: Christian Muirhead Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016, 09:26 Subject: Re: Big memory usage improvements To: Katherine Cox-Buday On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, 22:36

Re: Big memory usage improvements

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, 21:39 Menno Smits, wrote: > Interestingly the MongoDB memory usage profile is quite different as well. > I'm not sure if this is due to Christian's improvements or something else. > Thanks Menno! One of the fixes was a state.State instance being

Re: Big memory usage improvements

Indeed, this is amazing stuff: good job, it's great to see so significant improvements! I can't help but wonder about the bootstrap time: it goes up by 75s (from 114s to 189s, or ~66% increase)? Do you perhaps have multiple runs comparing just the bootstrap times to ensure it's related more to the