Comment 9 for bug 1750833

JIMM should probably be updated. However, if you bootstrap a Juju 2.2
controller (JIMM compatible), we should make sure that Juju 2.3 is able to
talk to it.

The reason Ian couldn't reproduce is that it isn't a bug in 2.4 talking to
2.3, it is a bug in 2.3 talking to 2.2.

John
=:->

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:59 AM, Anastasia <email address hidden>
wrote:

> I am all for fixing old juju code and will look at the PR but the
> question remains - if it's a code path/api that we are hoping to make
> obsolete, why does jimm use it? Should it not be updated to use later
> API?
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to juju.
> Matching subscriptions: juju bugs
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1750833
>
> Title:
> juju models reports "missing type, model details not valid"
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1750833/+subscriptions
>