Open Stack

For instance, we have thousands of servers still on Icehouse, we were working on our Mitaka upgrade and for the moment when we will be ready for the upgrade, we are already by two or three releases.
So, basically, we will be upgrading to a EOL release. Is that fair?

Edgar

On 4/11/17, 8:40 AM, "Kevin Bringard (kevinbri)" <kevinbri at cisco.com> wrote:

    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com>
    Date: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 9:30 AM
    To: "Kris G. Lindgren" <klindgren at godaddy.com>, Gaurav Goyal <er.gauravgoyal at gmail.com>, "openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org" <openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org>, "openstack-operators-request at lists.openstack.org" <openstack-operators-request at lists.openstack.org>
    Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Help: Liberty installation guide	(English).
    
        We should start having some releases known as LTS. It is very hard to keep updating the code every six months.
    
    
    I realize we’re off on a tangent now, but just wanted to say: this, times infinity. I’ve been making this case since Diablo when we stopped building packages and starting pushing support to vendors.
    
    Chasing trunk just isn’t feasible for larger organizations, and as Edgar mentioned, updating the code every 6 months (or even a year) is a really difficult proposition.
    
    There’s a reason large vendors do LTS releases; it just makes sense.