Rochelle Grober wrote: > Folks, > > This discussion and the people interested in it seem like a perfect > application of the SIG process. By turning LTS into a SIG, everyone can > discuss the issues on the SIG mailing list and the discussion shouldn't end > up split. If it turns into a project, great. If a solution is found that > doesn't need a new project, great. Even once there is a decision on how to > move forward, there will still be implementation issues and enhancements, so > the SIG could very well be long-lived. But the important aspect of this is: > keeping the discussion in a place where both devs and ops can follow the > whole thing and act on recommendations.
That's an excellent suggestion, Rocky. Moving the discussion to a SIG around LTS / longer-support / post-EOL support would also be a great way to form a team to work on that. Yes, there is a one-time pain involved with subscribing to the -sigs ML, but I'd say that it's a good idea anyway, and this minimal friction might reduce the discussion to people that might actually help with setting something up. So join: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-sigs While I'm not sure that's the best name for it, as suggested by Rocky let's use [lts] as a prefix there. I'll start a couple of threads. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
