Unable to kill-controller
Nate Finch
nate.finch at canonical.com
Wed Apr 6 21:50:31 UTC 2016
I obviously wasn't clear. I was suggesting a --yes-i-really-mean-it flag on
kill-controller, but if you passed just -y we show the prompt anyway
(instead of erroring out on an unknown flsg).
My point with the big prompt was in response to Rick saying it should never
be needed and should only be used in extreme circumstances... If that's how
we feel, we should make sure the user knows it.
Many people have said on this thread that the difference between
kill-controller and destroy-controller is not immediately obvious.., and
we're the devs on the project. I'm just trying to make sure we make it
clear for users.
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016, 4:54 PM Tim Penhey <tim.penhey at canonical.com> wrote:
> On 06/04/16 23:13, Nick Veitch wrote:
> > Sure, I am just concerned about a proliferation of commands to do the
> > same (ultimately) task
> >
> > destroy-controller
>
> The most correct way to take down a controller.
>
> > kill-controller
>
> The OMG it is broken, please do as much as you can and I know I'm going
> to have to manually check any resources left around that it couldn't
> clean up.
>
> > forget/purge-controller
>
> Remove local references to the controller.
>
>
> Not really the same things at all.
>
> Tim
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On 6 April 2016 at 11:59, Horacio Duran <horacio.duran at canonical.com
> > <mailto:horacio.duran at canonical.com>> wrote:
> >
> > The issue I see with that approach is that in that case
> > kill-controller might be doing less than you expect instead of more,
> > suppose the controller is having transient issues and kill
> > controller cannot reach the cloud for deletion, this would forget
> > the controller and leave it in the cloud, forget-controller instead
> > tells us very clearly what is going to happen, the change is going
> > to be local and not affect the controller.
> > My 2c
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, 6 April 2016, Nick Veitch <nick.veitch at canonical.com
> > <mailto:nick.veitch at canonical.com>> wrote:
> >
> > just my tuppence
> >
> > instead of having another command, can't we just add this as an
> > option to kill-controller?
> >
> > juju kill-controller --cleanup <controller>
> >
> >
> >
> > On 6 April 2016 at 11:05, Horacio Duran
> > <horacio.duran at canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I might be biased by years of apt-get but purge makes me
> > think that you are going to do what kill is supposed to do,
> > forget sound more aligned whit what you are really aiming to.
> >
> > On Wednesday, 6 April 2016, Andrew Wilkins
> > <andrew.wilkins at canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:29 AM Cheryl Jennings
> > <cheryl.jennings at canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > Relevant bug:
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1553059
> >
> > We should provide a way to clean up controllers
> > without making the user manually edit juju's files.
> >
> >
> > Unless anyone objects, or has a better spelling, I will
> > be adding a command to do this:
> >
> > juju purge-controller <controller-name>
> >
> > The command will require a "-y" or prompt for
> > confirmation, like kill-controller. It will not attempt
> > to destroy the controller, it will just remove the
> > details of it from the client.
> >
> > (Alternative suggestion for spelling: "juju
> > forget-controller". Purge-controller may suggest that
> > we're purging a controller of its contents, rather than
> > purging the controller from the client?)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Andrew
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Nate Finch
> > <nate.finch at canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > This just happened to me, too. Kill-controller
> > needs to work if at all possible. That's the
> > whole point. And yes, users may not hit
> > specific problems, but devs do, and that wastes
> > our time trying to figure out how to manually
> > clean up the garbage.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 8:33 AM Rick Harding
> > <rick.harding at canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:56 PM Andrew
> > Wilkins <andrew.wilkins at canonical.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > In a non-beta release we would make sure
> > that the config changes aren't backwards
> > incompatible.
> >
> >
> > I think this is the key thing. I think that
> > kill-controller is an exception to this
> > rule. I think we should always at least give
> > the user the ability to remove their stuff
> > and start over with the new alpha/beta/rc
> > release. I'd like to ask us to explore
> > making kill-controller an exception to this
> > policy and that if tests prove we can't
> > bootstrap on one beta and kill with trunk
> > that it's a blocking bug for us.
> > --
> > Juju-dev mailing list
> > Juju-dev at lists.ubuntu.com
> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> >
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juju-dev mailing list
> > Juju-dev at lists.ubuntu.com
> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> >
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juju-dev mailing list
> > Juju-dev at lists.ubuntu.com
> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nick Veitch,
> > CDO Documentation
> > Canonical
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nick Veitch,
> > CDO Documentation
> > Canonical
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> Juju-dev at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/attachments/20160406/146bbae9/attachment.html>
More information about the Juju-dev
mailing list