On Thursday, June 25, 2015 at 5:49:09 PM UTC-7, Eric Sorenson wrote: > On Thursday, June 25, 2015 at 2:43:34 PM UTC-7, Vince Skahan wrote:
> We absolutely do backport upstream fixes into the commercial releases, for > exactly the reasons that you describe. We do not backport *every* change, > as that gets insanely complicated really quickly. It's generally safer and > less confusing to regularly rebase onto newer upstream releases instead of > cherry-picking individual fixes. > > The process generally is that customers who are getting bit by bugs raise > support requests through the commercial support team, who work with product > management (my team) and the developers to get fixes prioritized, coded and > released. This particular bug didn't have any commercial support tickets > associated with it, nor any high community priority around it, so it just > slotted into the normal flow of upstream-into-product release train. > hmmm - I guess I was expecting something a little more proactive when an official PL module reveals a bug in the current official PE product. I'd have 'thought' that kind of scenario, especially with a two-liner fix, would have gotten into 3.8.x by definition as trivial to do, especially since 3.8.x will be around for 12+ months as you mention. You worked 4.x open source which was great, so it'll be there when 4.x PE comes out I guess, but I was kind of expecting the current PE product would have something like this in there without somebody needing to open a support ticket. If you want I can do that vs. 3.x via my work email if that would help..... I might add that the the discussion on the bug report showed whether to fix the PL module or the product showed this one got a lot of good thought. Only strange thing to me was that the two-liner fix is so trivial, I'd have expected it fixed by definition in at least the most recent supported PE version. >> - what can we expect in term of bug fixes in the 6 or more month >> window between Open Source 4.x and PE 4.x in terms of supporting your >> 'paying' customers ? >> >> I'm not sure why you keep putting quotes around 'paying'. It's real, > actual money from real customers, who we love a lot. :) > oh - I was just trying to draw the distinction between folks who give you money vs. folks running the free eval of the same product. As you said, the commercially licensed folks could open a ticket saying it's important to them and perhaps expect a little more responsiveness than an open source or eval user who might reasonably get an answer of *"understood - this is fixed in 4.0 open source, so you can go to that or alternately do the two-line patch for your open source 3.x installation*'. Hope this helps. You can see the release timeline and support lifecycle I > was talking about here: > https://puppetlabs.com/misc/puppet-enterprise-lifecycle > > yup - appreciate the response....let me know if you want me to open a ticket to get this into the next 3.8.x (via my work email). Thanks... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/e4e19a29-dca0-4b49-957e-8d7831e09053%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
