[Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Keeping Juno "alive" for longer.

Tom Cameron Tom.Cameron at rackspace.com
Mon Nov 9 19:01:36 UTC 2015

>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?

Tom Cameron

From: Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org>
Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 12:35
To: openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org
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
Jeremy Stanley

OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org

More information about the OpenStack-operators mailing list