dustymabe reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are
following:
``
After talking with people from the fedora community and from the atomic WG it
has become clear that there is a lot of confusion on our policy for support for
N-1 releases of Fedora Atomic Host.
First of
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
-1 on dropping Life Support for N-1 unless we're ready to shift to rolling
releases. That's pretty much the worst of all possible worlds.
Proposed policy: Life Support+
From the date N is released:
* We continue offering OSTree upda
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> -1 on dropping Life Support for N-1 unless we're ready to shift to rolling
> releases. That's pretty much the worst of all possible worlds.
> Proposed policy: Life Support+
> From the date N is released:
>
> We continue offering O
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> @jbrooks
> I'd just like to clarify for anyone reading this that "rolling" doesn't mean
> rolling like rawhide or suse tumbleweed, unless the wheel you have in mind is
> giant and square and "turns" once each six months when a new
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
In which case: if we're not supporting N-1, then what's the reason to not do a
rolling release?
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
__
jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
AFAICT, the thought is that rolling is a big disruptive thing, so we need to
study it first. We are in fact not supporting N-1 now, so making that official
isn't really a big deal.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
@jasonbrooks I am -1 to make desupporting the old ostree official without at
least a plan (and a deadline) to move to rolling upgrades. See #231 for my
explanation on why these two issues are inexorably tied together.
``
To reply,
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I'm going to schedule a meeting for next week to hash this out with the whole
Atomic WG that can make it.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
walters added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
One thing we could do that would be pretty easy is to add a new `/stable` ref
as a *symbolic link*, e.g. we'd do:
`ln -sr repo/refs/heads/fedora/26/x86_64/atomic-host
repo/refs/heads/fedora/stable/x86_64/atomic-host`
Then someone wh
walters added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
A rebase would only be required one time to track `/stable` - thereafter it'd
be a stream of minor updates, until such time as on the *server* we change the
link to point to the next major.
Basically the client is just going to downl
kushal added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1 on dropping support for N-1 releases.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject
jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
As discussed in the Atomic WG meeting, I've taken a crack at communicating this
change:
**Future Plans for Fedora Atomic Release Life Cycle**
* The Fedora Project ships new releases at ~6 month intervals, and
[maintains](https:/
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Suggested revision:
* Due in part to this faster pace, the Fedora Atomic workgroup has always
focused its testing and integration efforts most directly on the latest stable
release, encouraging users of the older release to rebase to
jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> Suggested revision:
>
> Due in part to this faster pace, the Fedora Atomic workgroup has always
> focused its testing and integration efforts most directly on the latest
> stable release, encouraging users of the older release
jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
PR for this blog post at: https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-site/pull/434
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
___
clo
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
jbrooks has published blog post on pa.io
http://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2017/06/future-plans-for-fedora-atomic-release-life-cycle/
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/2
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
waiting on fedora magazine post for this (to try to reach broader audience) and
then we'll close.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
_
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
fed mag post here:
https://fedoramagazine.org/upcoming-fedora-atomic-lifecycle-changes/
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
___
The status of the issue: `clarify policy on atomic host support for older
Fedora "number" releases` of project: `atomic-wg` has been updated to: Closed
as Fixed by dustymabe.
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.
19 matches
Mail list logo
