On Feb 26, 2015, at 9:49 AM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf <r...@researchut.com> wrote:
>> I think you've nailed where the disconnect is between the two sides of this >> issue: what exactly do we see OpenStack being? You brought up several Linux >> vendors who ship on a longish cycle, and who provide LTS for their releases. >> But Linux itself is on no such cycle, nor does it provide long term anything. > > But Linux is one monolith project. No, not really. The kernel may be, but if you want a distro that is useful to people, you need to collect a set of tools and apps that allow users to have a full computing experience. If Linux were a monolith, then there really wouldn't be any difference between Ubuntu and Slackware. > I am fairly new to OpenStack, but from what I've ascertained so far, > there are, now, individual sub-releases of individual projects. That > could be a difficult task for any Linux vendor, to distribute. I don't think that anyone is implying that it is easy to do, no matter where it is done. It does seem that there are significant disadvantages on the development side of things to have one group doing it all. -- Ed Leafe
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
