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.cozan...@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 <j...@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 that images are out of date?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 <j...@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" <jo...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Kapil Thangavelu >>>> <kapil.thangav...@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@lists.ubuntu.com >>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Juju mailing list >>> Juju@lists.ubuntu.com >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Juju mailing list >> Juju@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.cozan...@canonical.com > +33 616 702 389 > > > -- > Juju mailing list > Juju@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju > >
-- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
