Pre-release of Juju 1.11.2 for OSX (testing needed)

[David Cheney]

> Also, your formula is way more elegant then what I was thinking of for the
> *build from source* solution. (I didn't know that the Launchpad tarball had
> all the dependencies already). I say we contribute to make this the best
> formula possible.

re: the lp tarball, this is the same source release we give to our
packaging folks internally. There are some complicated questions to be
resolved about how one packages a Go program, but for the moment,
providing everything that is needed for a program is a good middle
ground, and lets us reuse it outside the debian packaging ecosystem.

> Well, that said, I've grabbed your branch and made some improvements [1] (I
> tried to open a pull request but GitHub isn't finding your fork for base
> selection). Basically added a "caveat" message (is this the better way to
> print a help message at the end of the install? Have seen lots of other
> formulas using this, but "caveats" seems like the wrong name for it), and a
> test function to check that the compiled binary is working (simply running
> "juju version").

That does sound like it stretches the literal meaning of caveat to
breaking point.

> I have a question though, in my previous formula I called it simply "juju"
> and you called it "juju-core". I find it a little confusing, to new users,
> to install *juju-core* and get the *juju* command. With the Go port being
> the main Juju version, what is the reasons to keep the apt-get package and
> Homebrew formula named as *juju-core*?

It was called juju-core because that is what brew create made of the
tarball name, I don't care about names, but I would note this

the binary, /usr/bin/juju is the client cli tool
the server component (not built by my receipe) is /usr/bin/jujud

Calling it Juju sounds like a solution.

> * There is also a way [2] to setup a devel version for Homebrew, this would
> be cool too so we can test the bleeding edge (will be looking for it later).
>
> [1] https://github.com/rochacon/homebrew/tree/juju-core-source-proposal
> [2]
> https://github.com/mxcl/homebrew/wiki/Formula-Cookbook#unstable-versions-head-devel
>
> -- Rodrigo Chacon
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:49 AM, David Cheney <david.cheney at canonical.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rodrigo,
>>
>> Sorry mate. I didn't intend to steal your thunder. Please feel free to
>> take my experimental brew formula and adopt it to your needs. Fair
>> warning, there will be a new development juju release this weekend,
>> and (fingers crossed) a new stable release the week after.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 6:08 PM, David Cheney
>> <david.cheney at canonical.com> wrote:
>> > Here we go, for brew at least
>> >
>> >
>> > https://github.com/davecheney/homebrew/compare/master...juju-core-source-proposal
>> >
>> > (/usr/local) % brew install juju-core
>> > ==> Downloading
>> >
>> > https://launchpad.net/juju-core/trunk/1.11.2/+download/juju-core_1.11.2.tar.gz
>> > Already downloaded: /Library/Caches/Homebrew/juju-core-1.11.2.tar.gz
>> > ==> mkdir -p src
>> > ==> mv code.google.com src
>> > ==> mv labix.org src
>> > ==> mv launchpad.net src
>> > ==> mv github.com src
>> > ==> go install launchpad.net/juju-core/cmd/juju
>> > �  /usr/local/Cellar/juju-core/1.11.2: 2 files, 14M, built in 8 seconds
>> > (/usr/local) % juju version
>> > 1.11.2-unknown-amd64
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:09 AM, David Cheney
>> > <david.cheney at canonical.com> wrote:
>> >> I am taking a pass at the Brew recipe and an MacPorts* companion today
>> >>
>> >> * this is not a forum for macports/brew advocacy, but lets just say,
>> >> not everyone thinks the sun shines out of brews preverbal.
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 6:11 AM, Jorge O. Castro <jorge at ubuntu.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 1:35 AM, David Cheney
>> >>> <david.cheney at canonical.com> wrote:
>> >>>> I'll try to convince them we
>> >>>> are serious and/or we can wait for 1.12 which will be shipping quite
>> >>>> soon.
>> >>>
>> >>> Hey so this is probably my fault, I figured since it was our first
>> >>> shot I would check the box that said "pre-release", didn't think
>> >>> people would actually read that though.
>> >>>
>> >>> I say we rally around 1.12 as that's coming up and in the meantime we
>> >>> can use the current tarball for people to test with.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Jorge Castro
>> >>> Canonical Ltd.
>> >>> http://juju.ubuntu.com/charm-championship - Share your infrastructure,
>> >>> win a prize!
>
>