{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/rancher/rancher/issues/6961","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/rancher/rancher","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/rancher/rancher/issues/6961/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/rancher/rancher/issues/6961/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/rancher/rancher/issues/6961/events","html_url":"https://github.com/rancher/rancher/issues/6961","id":193967976,"number":6961,"title":"Marketing + messaging around significant 1.2 upgrade maybe incorrect?","user":{"login":"untoldone","id":120943,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/120943?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone","html_url":"https://github.com/untoldone","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/untoldone/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":10,"created_at":"2016-12-07T06:25:07Z","updated_at":"2016-12-12T05:03:36Z","closed_at":null,"body":"**Rancher Version: 1.2\r\n\r\nGenerally speaking, I feel that Rancher could have had significantly better messaging around 1.2. I feel like the general theme of response to bugs, and forums has been \"things are broken because a lot of things changed in this release\". I feel that from an enterprise software perspective, this type of messaging, while maybe true, makes me feel uncomfortable trusting future releases.\r\n\r\nIt makes me feel like Rancher's internal practice says that it is ok to introduce a significant number of bugs in a GA release to the point that at least several people (seen in bugs and forums) have a relatively un-operational cluster (myself included). It makes me worry that this same type of release might happen in the future as there's nothing in place to prevent it.\r\n\r\nMore appropriate messaging could be (assuming it is true): \"We now know this release was bad, and here are the things we're doing to prevent it from happening in the future\".\r\n\r\nI really love the product, and this definitely won't cause me to go elsewhere. While I can't afford to be a customer today, I definitely hope to be one in the near future + support the future development. I hope this is seen as constructive feedback rather than me prodding in an unproductive way."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/rancher/rancher/issues/comments/266344024","html_url":"https://github.com/rancher/rancher/issues/6961#issuecomment-266344024","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/rancher/rancher/issues/6961","id":266344024,"user":{"login":"AdamNowotny","id":1185293,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1185293?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny","html_url":"https://github.com/AdamNowotny","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/AdamNowotny/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-12-12T05:03:36Z","updated_at":"2016-12-12T05:03:36Z","body":"The lesson for me is to lock versions used so no unplanned upgrades take place before we have a chance to test things. Made the mistake of running just \"rancher/server\" with no version specified in CloudFormation template and for some reason the EC2 instance died over the weekend and the new one upgraded Rancher to 1.2.0. So we started the Monday morning with all of non-production environments down (luckily prod was unaffected). Tried to just fix services in the new one for a while, but all I got is \"Timeout getting IP\", and \"Dependent services failed\" or something like that, ipsec and other infrastructure stacks in \"degraded\" mode, restarting services for no clear reason. In the end just had to revert server to 1.1.4 and recreate all environments. There was nothing in the release notes that stood out as a cause of the problems.\r\nIt was challenging to convince the client to use Rancher, now as much as I like it and would use it in the future, I feel like sadly the experiment here might be over..."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"AdamNowotny"}}