Excerpts from Olaf van der Spek's message of Sun Mar 18 07:02:05 -0700 2012: > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Eric Bergen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just because it's inconvenient to support an OS doesn't mean support > > should be dropped. CentOS 3 is *old*. CentOS 6 hasn't even been out > > for a year. CentOS 5 is still actively released and widely used. > > Unfortunately, yes. > The real question is: at what cost? >
Welcome to "DevOps". We've all seen the picture of the two guys with the wall between them, "I want change || I want stability". The movement to have comprehensive, useful test suites and measurements so that migrations can actually happen is helping to loosen things up a bit between the change vs. stability camps quite a bit. But its not universal and it still takes time, in some cases longer than a year. Abandoning the "old stable" releases of target platforms is a bit short sighted IMO. It forces people who are not migrated yet to couple adoption of Drizzle with their migrations. Dropping Ubuntu 10.10 is a no-brainer. Ubuntu will no longer support users on 10.10, why should Drizzle? But CentOS 5 users will be supported for quite some time, and I suspect users will continue using it for *years*. Its not like we do a ton of bug fixes on the GA releases. How many were actually made to 'elliot' ? 10-15 maybe? I think Drizzle can delay any backward incompatible breaks until after the GA release, surely. The cost of doing this is developers being frustrated at the inability to use a few cool new features of C++. Any others? That cost is only there for a very short while, so I think its worth it. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
