Pranith, This change [1] removing experimental xlators isn't merged yet. It should be taken in before you do your release.
[1]: https://review.gluster.org/15750 On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Niels de Vos <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
