ozzo-validation VS Juju

go-ozzo/ozzo-validation

https://github.com/go-ozzo/ozzo-validation Seems to do what I need but likely will need some convoluted reflection to build out the rules. Also likely some custom rules to be written which is okay since it's a one time cost and reuse in the expressions.

Personally I use ozzo validation: https://github.com/go-ozzo/ozzo-validation

This looks useful, but what differentiates it from something like https://github.com/go-ozzo/ozzo-validation ? Why would I use Valgo over something battle tested that follows a very similar pattern?

This is where it gets spicy: I just don't get at all who ever though this struct-tag based validation library was a good idea https://github.com/go-playground/validator - and yet it's the most mainstream one. Try to implement your own type, you're up to register some global validation tag and repeat it every time you're using that type. I'm grateful https://github.com/go-ozzo/ozzo-validation exists, that's what I use. But it's still way behind the other things I mention, where in general, it's simply not possible to pass around an invalid struct - because it can't be built if it's invalid in the first place.

Gin comes with built-in "validation", while Echo recommends the same validator. I am also not a fan of magic struct tags, so I would probably prefer either writing my own or using something like ozzo.

Other packages of note: https://github.com/uber-go/zap https://github.com/go-ozzo/ozzo-validation

Does https://github.com/go-ozzo/ozzo-validation meet your requirements?

https://github.com/go-ozzo/ozzo-validation/blob/v3.6.0/struct.go#L61

Basically juju is used to deploy microservices, and other stuff too: https://juju.is/

Juju https://juju.is/

https://juju.is/

Each app is packaged in a charm which seems to be a yaml declaring inputs, dependencies and other meta data and optional python code that can respond to certain lifecycle hooks

https://discourse.charmhub.io/t/implementing-relations/1051

   name: my-node-app

I am currently working myself through setting up our new Research GPU-Cluster where we have "sort of" managed to deploy MAAS to manage all the servers more efficiently, and on top of MAAS then use Juju to deploy the further components of the cluster. The components here are

Kubernetes Custom Resources were created to allow the Kubernetes API to be extended for domain-specific logic, by defining new resource types and controllers. OSS frameworks like operator-sdk, kubebuilder and juju were created to simplify the creation of custom resources and their controllers. Tools built with these frameworks came to be known as Operators.

Depending on what you're trying to accomplish, Juju and MAAS, if not just automate with preseed for custom desktops.

At Canonical I work on two open-source projects written in Go: Juju, a large cloud-based application deployment tool, and Pebble, a small Linux service manager. Both include CLI clients and API-based server daemons. Juju in particular is a large distributed system.

The new Portainer charm allows users of Canonical’s Charmed Kubernetes distribution to automatically install and integrate Portainer Business as part of the Kubernetes cluster deployment process, using Juju, the Charmed Operator framework.