Feature flag for a provider?

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2015-04-23 12:27 AM, John Meinel wrote:
> 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.

In other words, if they are using a CloudSigma environment, they have
accepted the risk of using the 1.24 version of the provider.  That is
true currently, but it won't be true in the future, when 1.25 is out.
 Presumably 1.25 is production-ready.  If 1.24 isn't production ready,
then if they switch to a different juju (e.g. switch from a desktop to
a laptop or use a team-mate's machine) they could be surprised by a
not-production-ready experience.

Of course, if 1.24's version *is* production-ready, then there's no
reason to keep it behind a flag.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVOPzhAAoJEK84cMOcf+9hFCQIAJoy+WpBhXYUDrrfQcuMbJFQ
2WxGgW1+Nu5Ro1hTgON7Kfxs4ZxSZxlUOZ6TbLFWhXgLgGSyaDh3xc/Mevmn/niX
VS2Ig8W/oMYEpumZ+n4950curoTClgwjA6v3BqipefLyljHZNfz95STgPoYOa8Qy
ydUKehum5FziqVg3+jy/EJZgktXrzA6BhZ+pa4PHp7ZMzhPhTedgR50rXsc841vs
EDYkEb4BxbqWlIJbOZ6Ul9tZb9Ve2CoOE7IBh9ykWCUGWCscIh4axdLGqODn1Obz
USlp4jzk8fYurSKcnnB5z7DiFcKzhwbR2V0PyN1gEf50LFbYWkbd5mLbE8P6Pyk=
=5xZY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----