local provider

[Curtis Hovey-Canonical]

On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Kapil Thangavelu
<kapil.thangavelu at canonical.com> 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?


-- 
Curtis Hovey
Canonical Cloud Development and Operations
http://launchpad.net/~sinzui