3 ms·

I'm curious to know about why you say that Juju overpromised and underdelivered. I definitely agree that the marketing of the technology detracts from making it

by peterlk 12y ago

I'm curious to know about why you say that Juju overpromised and underdelivered. I definitely agree that the marketing of the technology detracts from making it clear what the technology does, but Juju is still pretty cool. Perhaps you're thinking of MAAS (which is basically unusable)?

4ad 12y ago
No, I mean Juju. Juju overpromised that it will be ready years ago. It wasn't. Then it overpromised that the Go rewrite will only take a short while and that it will be production ready in a very short time. I would not call Juju production ready today, after all these years. Juju overpromised total independence from the underlying provider; EC2, MASS, OpenStack, LCX, etc. In reality the one that sucks less is EC2, and the difference from the others is pretty massive. Juju overpromised that it will change the way people build infrastructure. It changed nothing. Sure, the reason for that is a very complex phenomenon that's not only technical, but social and political as well. But that's kind of my point. Juju promised things it couldn't ever have a direct influence over.
- NateDad 12y ago
  I'm curious, when's the last time you used Juju? Juju has first class support for Azure, Joyent, HP, MAAS, and whatever Openstack you want, in addition to EC2. They're all at feature parity (plus or minus some pretty minor stuff). There are a lot of features still to be added, for sure... but calling it not production ready is disingenuous, IMO.
  - stonogo 12y ago
    Spoken like a Juju developer. The list of problems with Juju is not short, but the primary two are whatever is the opposite of synergistic: you are completely locked into ubuntu for every step, and the support available from canonical is utterly unacceptable. In this space, "the code is there" is step 1, and it took Juju an awfully long time to get there. Step 2 is "the system is sustainable" and that's currently where Juju falls over.
    - NateDad 12y ago
      As for the Ubuntu lock-in: we actually are going to be announcing support for deploying to Windows very soon (the code is all there now, we just need to work through some issues with the public clouds and Microsoft). And we're actively working on support for other linuxes (yes, including some in the redhat family), which will land in the next few months. I'm sorry you've had trouble with support. I would love to hear what problems you've seen, and how you think we can do better in that regard. The Juju team is still pretty small, so it can be difficult for us to cover all the places where people might want help, but we generally try to give the best support we can, when given the opportunity. I'm not sure what you mean about the system not being sustainable, if you could explain, that would be helpful.

by peterlk 12y ago

4ad 12y ago

No, I mean Juju. Juju overpromised that it will be ready years ago. It wasn't. Then it overpromised that the Go rewrite will only take a short while and that it will be production ready in a very short time. I would not call Juju production ready today, after all these years. Juju overpromised total independence from the underlying provider; EC2, MASS, OpenStack, LCX, etc. In reality the one that sucks less is EC2, and the difference from the others is pretty massive. Juju overpromised that it will change the way people build infrastructure. It changed nothing. Sure, the reason for that is a very complex phenomenon that's not only technical, but social and political as well. But that's kind of my point. Juju promised things it couldn't ever have a direct influence over.

NateDad 12y ago
I'm curious, when's the last time you used Juju? Juju has first class support for Azure, Joyent, HP, MAAS, and whatever Openstack you want, in addition to EC2. They're all at feature parity (plus or minus some pretty minor stuff). There are a lot of features still to be added, for sure... but calling it not production ready is disingenuous, IMO.
- stonogo 12y ago
  Spoken like a Juju developer. The list of problems with Juju is not short, but the primary two are whatever is the opposite of synergistic: you are completely locked into ubuntu for every step, and the support available from canonical is utterly unacceptable. In this space, "the code is there" is step 1, and it took Juju an awfully long time to get there. Step 2 is "the system is sustainable" and that's currently where Juju falls over.
  - NateDad 12y ago
    As for the Ubuntu lock-in: we actually are going to be announcing support for deploying to Windows very soon (the code is all there now, we just need to work through some issues with the public clouds and Microsoft). And we're actively working on support for other linuxes (yes, including some in the redhat family), which will land in the next few months. I'm sorry you've had trouble with support. I would love to hear what problems you've seen, and how you think we can do better in that regard. The Juju team is still pretty small, so it can be difficult for us to cover all the places where people might want help, but we generally try to give the best support we can, when given the opportunity. I'm not sure what you mean about the system not being sustainable, if you could explain, that would be helpful.