Support environment-specific placement directives in deploy/add-unit

[Andrew Wilkins]

We now support environment-specific placement directives in add-machine and bootstrap; we need to add support to deploy and add-unit. The difference with deploy/add-unit is that a directive may name a single machine (e.g. maas-name), or a constraint on a machine (e.g. ec2-az).

[Andrew Wilkins (axwalk)]

Based on offline discussions, I am closing this as WontFix. We will only support existing placement directive capabilities for deploy/add-unit, and only support provider-specific placement directives in add-machine and bootstrap.

[John A Meinel (jameinel)]

I'd love to hear more of this discussion. Given that the intent was to
always have availability zones as provider-specific placement directives,
why wouldn't we support "juju add-unit -n 1 --to ec2:us-east-1a" ?

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 8:31 PM, Andrew Wilkins <<email address hidden>
> wrote:

> Based on offline discussions, I am closing this as WontFix. We will only
> support existing placement directive capabilities for deploy/add-unit,
> and only support provider-specific placement directives in add-machine
> and bootstrap.
>
> ** Changed in: juju-core
> Status: Triaged => Won't Fix
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to juju-
> core.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1311976
>
> Title:
> Support environment-specific placement directives in deploy/add-unit
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1311976/+subscriptions
>

[Andrew Wilkins (axwalk)]

This should probably be taken to juju-dev. I had a brief discussion with William at the sprint about this topic, in which we reduced the scope to add-machine/bootstrap.

I think that supporting add-unit/deploy makes sense, but it does add quite a bit of complexity that we could do without until someone actually needs it; the initial use-cases for placement directives do not.

[John A Meinel (jameinel)]

That doesn't sound like a WontFix as much as a Low Priority on this bug,
then.

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 5:47 AM, Andrew Wilkins <<email address hidden>
> wrote:

> This should probably be taken to juju-dev. I had a brief discussion with
> William at the sprint about this topic, in which we reduced the scope to
> add-machine/bootstrap.
>
> I think that supporting add-unit/deploy makes sense, but it does add
> quite a bit of complexity that we could do without until someone
> actually needs it; the initial use-cases for placement directives do
> not.
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to juju-
> core.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1311976
>
> Title:
> Support environment-specific placement directives in deploy/add-unit
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1311976/+subscriptions
>

[Andrew Wilkins (axwalk)]

I will reopen at Low, and bring it back up for discussion.