Open Stack

BTW, what's the EOL date of Juno?

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Tom Cameron <Tom.Cameron at rackspace.com>
wrote:

> On a personal level, supporting the same release of an open source project
> for 5 years is something you should pay for...dearly. If operators have
> customers that are pinned to Juno for some reason I couldn't imagine right
> now, and they're willing to pay us to support it, then great!
>
>
> But I think we need to very tightly scope what support means- Absolutely
> no back or forward porting. The features you have now are frozen in time.
> Also, they need to be tightly pinned to the OS distro repo versions of
> packages so we don't have to care about fixing critical vulns in stuff we
> don't maintain and can't control. This basically means they'll be paying us
> to make sure they can upgrade distro packages for security reasons and that
> OpenStack will keep functioning, and to file & patch upstream OpenStack
> bugs.
>
>
> Effectively this means they're settling for less value for their money if
> they remain on Juno for the full 5 years, whereas customers using newer
> versions of operators' OpenStack offerings will be getting new development
> and features for the same support dollars (which is a good way to market
> new versions to them, BTW).
>
>
> My $0.02
>
>
>
> --
> Tom Cameron
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>


-- 
Gareth

*Cloud Computing, OpenStack, Distributed Storage, Fitness, Basketball*
*OpenStack contributor, kun_huang at freenode*
*My promise: if you find any spelling or grammar mistakes in my email from
Mar 1 2013, notify me *
*and I'll donate $1 or ￥1 to an open organization you specify.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20151110/c9b6a5b9/attachment.html>