New feature for charmers - min-juju-version

[Nate Finch]

Yes, it'll be ignored, and the charm will be deployed normally.

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:29 PM Ryan Beisner <ryan.beisner at canonical.com>
wrote:

> This is awesome.  What will happen if a charm possesses the flag in
> metadata.yaml and is deployed with 1.25.x?  Will it gracefully ignore it?
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Nate Finch <nate.finch at canonical.com>
> wrote:
>
>> There is a new (optional) top level field in the metadata.yaml file
>> called min-juju-version. If supplied, this value specifies the minimum
>> version of a Juju server with which the charm is compatible. When a user
>> attempts to deploy a charm (whether from the charmstore or from local) that
>> has min-juju-version specified, if the targeted model's Juju version is
>> lower than that specified, then the user will be shown an error noting that
>> the charm requires a newer version of Juju (and told what version they
>> need). The format for min-juju-version is a string that follows the same
>> scheme as our release versions, so you can be as specific as you like. For
>> example, min-juju-version: "2.0.1-beta3" will deploy on 2.0.1 (release),
>> but will not deploy on 2.0.1-alpha1 (since alpha1 is older than beta3).
>>
>> Note that, at this time, Juju 1.25.x does *not* recognize this flag, so
>> it will, unfortunately, not be respected by 1.25 environments.
>>
>> This code just landed in master, so feel free to give it a spin.
>>
>> -Nate
>>
>> --
>> 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/20160317/fcb2cec9/attachment.html>