On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:55:09AM -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote: > 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.
Oh, yes, great idea! LTS: Long Term Stable - 1 year of bugfixes STS: Short Term Stable - 3 months of bugfixes We should use that :D Niels
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
