On 11/09/15 21:01, Tom Cameron wrote:
From your other thread...
Or else you're saying you intend to fix the current inability of our projects
to skip intermediate releases entirely during upgrades
I think without knowing it, that's what most would be suggesting, yeah. Of
course, like you mentioned, the real work is in how upgrades get refactored to
skip intermediate releases (two or three of them).
DB schema changes can basically be rolled up and kept around for a while, so
that's not too be a problem. Config files OTOH have no schema or schema
validator, so that would require tooling and all kinds of fun (bug prone)
wizardry.
This is all solvable, but it adds complexity for the sake of what I can only
imagine are the extreme minority of users. What do the user/operator surveys
say about the usage of older releases? What portion of the user base is
actually on releases prior to Havana?
I would not call that the extreme minority.
I would say a good percentage of users are on only getting to Juno now.
--
Tom Cameron
________________________________________
From: Jeremy Stanley <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 12:35
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno
"alive" for longer.
On 2015-11-09 17:11:35 +0000 (+0000), Tom Cameron wrote:
[...]
I support an LTS release strategy because it will allow more
adoption for more sectors by offering that stability everyone's
talking about. But, it shouldn't be a super-super long support
offering. Maybe steal some of Ubuntu's game and do an LTS every 4
releases or so (24 months), but then maybe Openstack only supports
them for 24 months time? Again, my concern is that this is free,
open source software and you're probably not going to get many
community members to volunteer to offer their precious time fixing
bugs in a 2-year-old codebase that have been fixed for 18 months
in a newer version.
[...]
Because we want people to be able upgrade their deployments, the
problem runs deeper than just backporting some fixes to a particular
branch for longer periods of time. Unfortunately the original poster
cross-posted this thread to multiple mailing lists so the discussion
has rapidly bifurcated, but I addressed this particular topic in my
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-November/078735.html
reply.
--
Jeremy Stanley
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-operators mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-operators mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
--
Best Regards,
Maish Saidel-Keesing
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-operators mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
