Comment 5 for bug 1299120

Everyone else you have talked to is also wrong then. It is a question of usability, not of which one sounds more "linuxy" in some way. Although even there I would have to say that there are plenty of other common tools which have a configure command. Your argument seems to be that users will expect and recognise 'init' as a common option, but that doesn't really help if they don't have a clue what it actually does in a Juju context.

If I did a survey of 100 random Ubuntu users and asked them what the expected results of those two command variants were, well, we don't even need to do a survey.
Also, if after using Juju for a short while, you asked someone to recall what the command for generating the configuration was, I'm pretty sure more people would remember juju generate-config.

So, really, I don't see what the advantage of juju init actually is, other than it is quicker to type. My underlying mission here is to help people use Juju confidently and easily, and recommending 'init' over 'generate-config' doesn't support that. That's why all the documentation uses generate-config.

I filed this bug because I wanted to harmonise what we are saying in the help with the documentation online, because I think it is confusing for users otherwise. I don't really care which command people use in the privacy of their own server rooms, and I don't think you should stop using it if it makes you feel more FLOSSy.

Juju quickstart is a good option for the docs, once it achieves a more reliable parity with Juju.