What to do with precise charms?

[Matt Bruzek]

Hello Jose,

Thanks for bringing this topic up! You make a good point there are going to
be three supported LTS releases available to Juju. I do not think we will
ask any maintainer to support all three releases. Currently each charm
lives in its own release and I would expect the precise charm contains an
older version of a service. It does not make sense to me that someone would
try to port the latest version of a service to the precise (12.04) charm.
If a charm happens to work on multiple releases we are talking about adding
support for that in Juju 2.0.

Our current unmaintained process addresses when an author is not responding
or maintaining the charms. We should come up with a process for "active"
charm developers to deprecate their precise charms. If a charm
developer/maintainer wants to deprecate a charm, I have seen someone
authors replace the entire readme and metadata with a deprecation warning
pointing to the latest version of the charm and get that through the review
process.

Although I don't expect we will have to do this very frequently, we locked
charms to releases so charms would continue to work with the packages that
were available in that release of the operating system. I hope that precise
charms continue to work in precise, and if that is not the case create a
bug and the author can fix the failure or put a depreciated message in the
metadata and readme.

Did I address the question you were talking about? If not please give us
more details.

Thanks!

   - Matt Bruzek <matthew.bruzek at canonical.com>

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:47 PM, José Antonio Rey <jose at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> In approximately two months, Xenial is going to be released. Once that
> happens, we are going to have three supported LTS releases: precise, trusty
> and xenial.
>
> I know that there is some people that have both precise and trusty charms.
> However, if they want to move their charms to xenial, they are going to
> have to maintain not two, but three charms. And if we want to have the
> latest in all charms, then features and software versions would have to be
> backported all the way to precise, which may complicate things a bit more.
>
> I'm wondering, would it be suitable for us to establish a process where a
> charm author decides to no longer maintain a charm in an old but supported
> release and just move that specific series charm to ~unmaintained-charms? I
> think it's better to start thinking on this now, before it gets too close
> to release time.
>
> Happy to hear all your comments/suggestions on this.
>
> --
> José Antonio Rey
>
> --
> 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/20160219/36177c1c/attachment.html>