I can confirm that we for sure also depend on the stable 2.0 in xenial.
It actually is very easy to install a more recent version nested in 2.0 for
specific use cases.
2017-04-05 23:53 GMT+02:00 Stéphane Graber :
> Yes, it would be.
>
> I also disagree that it's what most people would want.
>
>
Yes, it would be.
I also disagree that it's what most people would want.
The majority of the feedback we've been getting from production users so
far is that they're very happy having an extremely stable version of LXD
that they don't need to think about and that gets frequent bugfixes and
securi
Would it be against distribution policy to upgrade the lxd package in
xenial? I feel like most users do not want 2.0, but that's what they
get by default.
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:49 AM, Stéphane Graber
wrote:
Hi,
So it really depends on how tolerant you may be to accidental downtime
and ne
Hi,
So it really depends on how tolerant you may be to accidental downtime
and need to occasionaly adapt scripts as new features are added.
LXD 2.0.x only gets bugfixes and security updates and so an upgrade will
never break anything that uses the LXD commands or the API.
For the newer feature
Hi Guys
I would like to take advantage in some of the new(er) features available
in releases higher than 2.0.x
Would it be advisable to upgrade to 2.12 to be used in a production
environment?
--
Regards
Gabriel Marais
Office: +27 861 466 546 x 7001
Mobile: +27 83 663
Mail: gabr
