The move to 2.0 gives the wrong impression to new users

[Rick Harding]

Merlijn, nothing at all to apologize for. It's not nitpicking and is a very
true pain point right now. Originally we had planned to have Juju 2.0 out
in Xenial and the default. Xenial is due to be supported for five years and
so there were calls we needed to make to set us up for success looking at
that five year plan. It was with that in mind that we made Juju 2.0 the
default and put it in main. Juju 1.X is scheduled to EOL when Trusty does
(April of 2019). It's in a critical only fix mode until then.

What this means is that we're in an awkward place until Juju 2.0 goes GA.
The team is working as hard as possible to get there, but also wants to
take full advantage of the 2.0 to clean up and fix things that were pain
points in Juju 1.X. There has been so much great use and feedback of Juju
2.0 from everyone out there that we've identified and worked on more than
originally planned. Chances to truly apply things we've learned from the
last 4+ years are rare and we've had to accept this current transition pain
in order to provide a great Juju to our users.

All I can say is I'm sorry for the pain right now. We believe it's
justified and since users are getting Xenial by default now we updated the
web documentation to point them towards what's in 2.0. Until we had done
that, users coming to Juju from Xenial were suffering in that they'd
apt-get install juju and then find the documentation and jujucharms.com
commands didn't apply to them at all.

Our current task is to get through the last bits of work that we've
identified as "must fix" during the 1.X to 2.X transition and get 2.0 GA
out there for everyone. Then the pain will let up and we'll all be in a
much better place. We believe the best thing we can do for the Juju brand
is to have the most solid and easiest to use Juju 2.0 that we can build so
that when folks try they'll find it's the best tool for the job and much
much easier to understand and adopt.

Rick

On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 7:38 AM Merlijn Sebrechts <
merlijn.sebrechts at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all
>
>
> I think that the way the move to Juju 2.0 is being handled gives the wrong
> impression to (new) users. Some examples:
>
>
>    - The docs default to Juju 2.0 but show a big red warning banner that
>    2.0 isn't ready for production. A user reading the warning banner might
>    think "This isn't what I want. I want a production-ready system.". The user
>    then proceeds to click on the "stable" link in the top left corner only to
>    find himself back to the 2.0 docs. So 2.0 is not production ready but is
>    considered stable?
>    - The Charm store also has switched to show the Juju 2.0 commands.
>    Here it is even worse, since there is no way to revert back to the 1.25
>    commands. This is very confusing for newcomers as you can see in the case
>    of Steve Pe.
>    - Today I start my laptop and try to connect to my Juju cluster only
>    to find that `juju-1` has been uninstalled during an upgrade. I'm running
>    the latest stable Ubuntu LTS (16.04.1), I'm using the stable juju ppa and
>    I'm using the latest stable Juju. This gives off the impression that Juju
>    is not production ready.
>
>
> I totally understand that you want as much people banging on Juju 2.0 as
> possible, but I think you are hurting the Juju brand in the process.
>
>
> Sorry for the rant. Maybe I'm just nitpicking..
>
> Kind regards
> Merlijn Sebrechts
> --
> 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/20160808/bf44e7cb/attachment.html>