disabling upgrades on new machines by default?

[Matt Rae]

I don't think the upgrade matters as much as speed. I feel like most users
know to manage updates already, with their own policies, and that the fast
user experience is important.

Even if juju upgrades initially, users will still need to manage updates
after, so I'm not sure how much the initial upgrade gains.

"Juju is blazing fast!" is more exciting than "Juju makes sure I'm updated
initially!"

There is something to be said for having the exact same packages on every
unit of a service rather than a few units having some versions, then units
added later getting different versions.

Matt

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Samuel Cozannet <
samuel.cozannet at canonical.com> wrote:

> Why not put our perception to the test?
>
> Here
> <https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/spreadsheets/d/1T-8rf_XxXbvCCRRHT69KtRM5k4oJiHyTEuzbENBU0Js/edit#gid=0>
> is a spreadsheet where you can compile your variables. The top line
> summarizes the sum of values. The column that gets green is the one we
> should go for [assuming we are representative]
>
> Sam
>
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:45 AM, John Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com>
> wrote:
>
>> So there is the question of what is the "user experience", and people
>> trying out Juju and it seems slow. Though if it is slow, doesn't that mean
>> that images are out of date?
>>
>> I just bootstrapped a fresh Ubuntu from Amazon's web interface today, and
>> I noticed that apt-get upgrade on there installed a new bash to fix the
>> newest major security hole. It seems like it is good to at least apply
>> security updates, and I'm not sure if it is easy to only install those.
>>
>> John
>> =:->
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:51 AM, José Antonio Rey <jose at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I believe that, as Jorge mentioned, most users do value having
>>> everything up to date by default, specially when they may go directly to
>>> production environments. Devs may also want to use this switch, as it will
>>> save time during the deployment for testing the charms they have developed.
>>>
>>> I believe that turning on upgrades as a default would be more valued by
>>> end-users, but that's just a personal opinion.
>>>
>>> --
>>> José Antonio Rey
>>> On Oct 1, 2014 2:34 PM, "Jorge O. Castro" <jorge at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Kapil Thangavelu
>>>> <kapil.thangavelu at canonical.com> wrote:
>>>> > juju can save minutes per machine (especially against release images)
>>>> if we
>>>> > turn off upgrades by default.
>>>>
>>>> There are some updates coming to how we build cloud images that might
>>>> be relevant to this discussion:
>>>>
>>>> http://blog.utlemming.org/2014/08/archive-triggered-cloud-image-builds.html
>>>>
>>>> IMO safer and slower makes sense for most people, those of us who need
>>>> speed for demos/conferences will know about this switch.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jorge Castro
>>>> Canonical Ltd.
>>>> http://juju.ubuntu.com/ - Automate your Cloud Infrastructure
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Juju mailing list
>>>> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Juju mailing list
>>> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Juju mailing list
>> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Samuel Cozannet
> Cloud, Big Data and IoT Strategy Team
> Strategic Program Manager
> Changing the Future of Cloud
> Ubuntu <http://ubuntu.com> / Canonical <http://canonical.com> UK LTD
> samuel.cozannet at canonical.com
> +33 616 702 389
>
>
> --
> Juju mailing list
> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20141002/c405b5d6/attachment.html>