On 10/1/14, 11:53 AM, "Morgan Fainberg" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >On Wednesday, October 1, 2014, Sean Dague <[email protected]> wrote: > >As stable branches got discussed recently, I'm kind of curious who is >actually stepping up to make icehouse able to pass tests in any real >way. Because right now I've been trying to fix devstack icehouse so that >icehouse requirements can be unblocked (and to land code that will >reduce grenade failures) > >I'm on retry #7 of modifying the tox.ini file in devstack. > >During the last summit people said they wanted to support icehouse for >15 months. Right now we're at 6 months and the tree is basically unable >to merge code. > >So who is actually standing up to fix these things, or are we going to >just leave it broken and shoot icehouse in the head early? > > -Sean > >-- >Sean Dague >http://dague.net > > > >We should stick with the longer support for Icehouse in my opinion. I'll >happily volunteer time to help get it back into shape. > > >The other question is will Juno *also* have extended stable support? Or >is it more of an LTS style thing (I'm not a huge fan of the LTS model, >but it is easier in some regards). If every release is getting extended >support, we may need to look at our tool > chains so we can better support the releases. > > >Cheers, >Morgan > > >Sent via mobile Would ever release need to be LTS or would every other release (or every 4th) release be LTS? We could consider a policy like Ubuntu’s (e.g., 10.04 12.04, 14.04 are all LTS and the next will be 16.04). — Ian _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
