This is something I raised with Marco, Matt and Chuck while in the Charmers Summit. There are several mixed opinions with regards to this, some say it's logical because each unit in an environment is unique, however it's not how Juju used to behave, hence breaking most of the tests in the store, which were designed to run considering the old unit naming scheme. I don't disagree with it, and the fix is simple enough. But please let's try and give a grace period before, so tests that have been already created can adapt to the new scheme and don't give false positives, as well as for people to adapt to the new naming scheme and understand why it's been changed. -- José Antonio Rey <div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Fri, Nov 13, 2015, 10:10 Mark Shuttleworth <<a href="mailto:mark@ubuntu.com">mark@ubuntu.com</a>> wrote: </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> OK. So I suspect the tests were written to reuse the environment because bootstrapping takes time. The good news is, we'll shortly get instant environment creation, so a clean environment will be cheap and fast. :) Mark On 13/11/15 10:02, Matthew Williams wrote: > Hi Mark, Sunitha, > > My apologies, I should have included the explanation in the original email. > > This was a change to address a long standing bug: > <a href="https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1174610" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1174610</a> > > There's a discussion in the bug report, but the summary is that in most > cases it's desirable to have the unit id be unique across the life of an > environment. Otherwise you loose the identity of a unit across relations. > > We were already numbering the machines in the same way, so this change also > gives us consistency between machine and unit numbering systems. > > Thanks > > Matty > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Mark Shuttleworth <<a href="mailto:mark@ubuntu.com" target="_blank">mark@ubuntu.com</a>> wrote: > >> Thanks Sunitha. Matty, deeper question is - was this an intended change >> in behaviour, and what's the rationale? >> >> Mark >> -- Juju mailing list <a href="mailto:Juju@lists.ubuntu.com" target="_blank">Juju@lists.ubuntu.com</a> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju</a> </blockquote></div>