Interim plan to move away from the mongo tarball

[Mark Ramm]

On 03/27/2013 05:50 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Mark Ramm
> <mark.ramm-christensen at canonical.com>  wrote:
>> I did read it.  I take it that you are now referring to the " bootstrapping
>> only happens on the specific series that the respective juju in use was
>> deployed on" I'm sorry if I was confused about that -- I did read the
> I'm not "now" referring to it. I've proposed that 10h ago, 7h before
> you sent a message dismissing the whole conversation as "we don't have
> time" and ignoring that proposal.
>
>> thread, and was interested in discussion on locking down the bootstrap node
>> to the "current" series, but thought that perhaps you were still also
>> arguing for the tarball solution -- particularly since you said in the
>> e-mail I replied to "if you can't spare the time to build a tarball with
>> binaries, nothing else will do."
> The entire paragraph is "If you're in such a hurry, you can DO NOTHING
> rather than half-baking a solution that has seen little discussion and
> has known real problems being ignored. WHAT EXISTS TODAY isn't
> perfect but works, and if you can't spare the time to build a tarball
> with binaries, nothing else will do."
>
>
> gustavo @http://niemeyer.net
I don't know what else to say other than to reiterate that I'm sorry 
that I misunderstood you.

I didn't understand that the e-mail you sent to James constituted a 
change of direction from you and a new "proposal," and thought it was 
merely an exploration of possible options.

I think it was a reasonable mistake, but it was a mistake, and it was my 
mistake and I apologize for it.

--Mark