+1
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Patrick Creech wrote:
> Since there appears to be agreement from dev and qe, I'm adding a note to
> the beta announcement for
> 2.14.3 with the expectation that 2.14.3 will be the last of the 2.14 line.
>
> On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 14:15 -0500, Patrick Creech wro
Since there appears to be agreement from dev and qe, I'm adding a note to the
beta announcement for
2.14.3 with the expectation that 2.14.3 will be the last of the 2.14 line.
On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 14:15 -0500, Patrick Creech wrote:
> While it is typically standard practice to no longer release z
That all sounds reasonable. I think it's fine to assume we won't do a
2.14.4 unless there is an emergency.
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Patrick Creech wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 15:08 -0500, Jeremy Audet wrote:
> > Do you think it will be possible to push an emergency 2.14.4 build out
>
On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 15:08 -0500, Jeremy Audet wrote:
> Do you think it will be possible to push an emergency 2.14.4 build out the
> door if necessary? Or
> an emergency 2.13.z build? I love the idea of throwing away old processes
> that are weighing us
> down. But there are business needs to co
Do you think it will be possible to push an emergency 2.14.4 build out the
door if necessary? Or an emergency 2.13.z build? I love the idea of
throwing away old processes that are weighing us down. But there are
business needs to consider.
___
Pulp-dev ma
While it is typically standard practice to no longer release z streams for the
.y-1 release after we
release the .y, there are valid exceptions to this rule that we have observed a
few times in the
past. Therefore, I would like to make it explicit that we will not push
another 2.14 build after
