On 06/14/2016 10:59 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 11:02:12PM -0400, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
But we don't need to guess, we can just ask our resident legal
counsel, who wi ll tell us if there are any implications to calling
our planned long life cycle release of Community GlusterFS an "LTS
release."
Off hand I wouldn't expect there to be, but––
Richard (and Ric) what, if any, implications are there? Should we pick a
different name?
No objection to "LTS" from me. I do not consider the 'S" to imply
"commercial support" if that's what the concern is (but even if it
did, that would not create any legal issue). I defer to Ric on whether
there could be some non-legal concern around using "LTS".
Richard
The kernel calls its long term upstream versions "stable" releases or branches.
LTS could stand for long term stable I suppose :)
I don't think that we really care much, what we call the community branches
should be a community call. I would agree that avoiding "supported" in the title
is probably a good thing, but don't lose sleep over those terms.
thanks for bringing this up!
Ric
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
