Re: Can I help with the 2.1 release?

[Willy Tarreau]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 11:10:35PM +0300, Valter Jansons wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:37 PM Julien Pivotto  
> wrote:
> > I'm with Lukas on this. 2.1 is a strong release, and we should be
> > grateful for everyone which is using that release, as their feedback is
> > valuable for the building the next releases of HAProxy.
> 
> My apologies if the message sounded ungrateful, for rolling out new
> changes and testing. As the latest 2.2.0 release did show just
> recently, there is great benefit in people running upcoming (new)
> changes.

No offense, don't worry :-)

We're used to say that odd versions being maintained for less time, we're
allowed to take more risks with them and we know that most of their users
are those autonomous enough to roll back or switch to another one in case
of trouble. As such, the stability of an odd version can be a bit more
chaotic than the one of an even one, and that's by choice to preserve more
users. Also I'm less reluctant to backport small features to odd versions
than for even ones (it's a give and take, brave users test & report issues
and in exchange they can get a version that better suits their needs). In
other areas of the industry, the terms "early availability" and "general
deployment" exist to designate these different stability statuses, and I
think that they model what we do quite well.

Of course when a new version is issued, it needs a little bit of time to
dry up, and a few surprises are expected. But the point is that there
should be (by design) less risks to upgrade from 2.1.x to 2.2.x than from
2.0.x to 2.1.x two months after the new major release is emitted. Here
we're facing something unusual in that 2.1 appeared to be exceptionally
stable and 2.2 started with some rough edges, so at this point of the
cycle the difference in stability expectations might still be less visible
of course.

Anyway, the point of maintaining long term supported versions is that
anyone is free to use the one that best suits their needs. Anything
between the oldest that supports all needed features, to the latest
stable enough for the use case is fine.

As a rule of thumb, I'd say that it's probably OK to always be late by
one or two stable versions on average. This should help one figure what
branch to deploy: if the latest stable emits one version every two weeks,
it means you need to upgrade your production every two to four weeks. If
an older stable one produces one version every 6 months, it may allow you
not to care about your prod for 6 months to one year. But in any case
there is always the risk of a critical bug requiring an urgent deployment,
so you should see this as a rule of thumb only and not a strict rule.

Hoping this clarifies the process a bit.

Willy

Kindly check my new site for posting.

[Manager Specialist]

Hi.

How are you.

Kindly check my new site for posting.

www.bloglovin.com
www.fotolog.com
www.FeedsPortal.com

www.thefrisky.com
www.theodysseyonline.com
www.connect.unity.com
www.hiboox.com
www.hercampus.com
www.omegaunderground.com
www.edublogs.org
www.imagup.com
www.thetab.com
www.davidicke.com
www.vegasnews.com
www.acidcow.com
www.trueactivist.com
www.thesportsbank.net
www.teamctf.com
www.thelibertarianrepublic.com
www.activerain.com
www.apsense.com
www.dailynewshungary.com
www.motorward.com
www.ghanasoccernet.com
www.fundly.com
www.artdaily.com
www.ifpnews.com
www.incrediblethings.com
www.businesssystemguide.com
www.Demotix.com 
www.fashionisers.com
www.e-architect.co.uk
www.laprogressive.com
www.the-pool.com
www.newsday.co.zw
www.pitchengine.com
www.officialroyalwedding2011.org
www.inserbia.info
www.thestandard.co.zw
www.indiawest.com
www.thesportsdaily.com
www.easybranches.com
www.vagabondish.com
www.pc-tablet.com
www.diyactive.com
www.itnewsafrica.com
www.nativenewsonline.net
www.SpaceCoastDaily.com

www.chartattack.com
www.PinkIsTheNewBlog.com

www.deadlinenews.co.uk
www.theisozone.com
www.usupdates.com
www.Icharts.net 
Do you need it post then let me know.

Waiting for your response.

Thank you.