On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 04:52:29PM -0500, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: > On 11/10/2016 04:12 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Niels de Vos <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The packages from the CentOS Storage SIG will by default provide the > > > latest LTM release. The STM release is provided in addition, and needs > > > an extra step to enable. > > > > > > I am not sure how we can handle this in other distributions (or also > > > with the packages on d.g.o.). > > > > Maybe we should not flip the LATEST for non-RPM distributions in > > d.g.o? or should we introduce LTM/LATEST and encourage users to change > > their repository files to point to this? > > I like having LATEST and LTM symlinks, but--- > > Did we decide that after 3.8 the next LTM release will be 3.10? (Or 4.0 > whenever that lands?) And an LTM release is maintained for 12 or 18 months? > > If so there probably will be two active LTM releases, assuming we can ship > the next releases on time.
Yes, and we have is documented (with diagrams!) on https://www.gluster.org/community/release-schedule/ , see the "Post-3.8" section. > We should have LTM-3.8 and eventually LTM-3.10 symlinks then. Or are there > other ideas? > > > Packaging in distributions would be handled by package maintainers and > > I presume they can decide the appropriateness of a release for > > packaging? > > Indeed. Well, that's the status quo, and beyond our control in any event. We should probably send out a reminder to the packaging list as that should contain all known packagers for different distributions. Including 3.9 in a distribution might be appropriate for some, as long as the distribution/version goes EOL before our STM release. Niels
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
