On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:52 PM, John Johansen <john.johan...@canonical.com> wrote: > On 04/06/2016 02:32 PM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: >> On 6 April 2016 at 22:25, Xen <l...@xenhideout.nl> wrote: >>> Bryan Quigley schreef op 06-04-16 22:35: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> The naming scheme of just "Ubuntu 14.04.4 LTS" is no longer >>>> meaningful when it comes to determining what kernel/mesa/xorg you are >>>> on. It's also confusing to many users what 14.04.4 actually means >>>> and it makes determining if you are supported more difficult [1]. >>>> >>>> I propose for 16.04 we change it so that the HWE# is included in the >>>> version, so it's trivial to determine the support level. >>>> >>>> So for example, if we had done this for 14.04 we would have releases like: >>>> Ubuntu 14.04.4 LTS - Everyone up-to-date with stock kernel >>>> Ubuntu 14.04.3 LTS HWE15.04 - Out of date with vivid kernel >>>> Ubuntu 14.04.4 LTS HWE15.04 - Up-to-date with vivid kernel >>> >>> Personally I feel that naming scheme is hideous and will confuse even >>> more people. >>> >>> What does HWE even mean? I can look it up, but it is not like it is some >>> kind of well known acronym or abbreviation. >>> >>> (The way I understood it these point releases indeed brought new kernels >>> in addition to something else. The confusion that I experienced was more >>> the weird focus on end-of-support dates that was different for every >>> point release, creating tiers of support that utterly confused me, >>> particularly because the context with other (newer) versions of the >>> distribution was not clear. The idea of point releases bringing new >>> kernels and that "HWE" is not confusing at all. However, if this >>> dramatically is going to change "end of support" dates, then suddenly it >>> is not comprehensible anymore --- did it mean that a getting point >>> release meant less support? >>> >>> What I remember is that the point releases had less support, which is >>> not understandable because they are newer systems. >>> >>> Also if a point release actually means newer versions of all software >>> this is confusing by itself. Creating the ability for new hardware is >>> easy to understand. But if repos for .3 and .4 are going to be entirely >>> different, and now you are going to create 2 dimensions: currency of >>> software, and currency of kernel/HWE and you can mix them at will: that >>> is not helpful. >>> >>> So I would suggest the confusion did not come from the naming scheme. >>> The confusion came from the fact that these varying levels of support >>> were incomprehensible. If anything upgrading to a newer kernel should be >>> recommended and encouraged for the largest part and if anything that >>> should give the benefit of longer support -- since you are up to date >>> now, right? >>> >>> The fact that 14.04.1 is listed at end of life april 2019 and 14.04.2 is >>> listed at august 2016 is just utterly confusing. Changing the naming is >>> not going to help that. >>> >>> If these two components have different EOL you can just say so, I'm not >>> sure if that is the case. >>> >>> So if you wanted some thoughts, my thought is that your proposal here >>> would increase the confusion while not tackling the real issue. >>> >>> Regards. >>> >> >> LTS has 5 years of support. >> >> There are multiple kernels available with full 5 year support: >> - original (from .0 original release & .1 release) >> - next-lts (from a .5 point release) >> >> Intermediate releases backports: >> - Available in .2; .3; .4 >> - Supported until .5 release which comes with next-LTS kernel >> - Upgrade path is to the next LTS release, or to the .5 HWE stack >> >> We do send EOL announcements for the HWE kernels. I do not believe we >> automatically upgrade people from them to the .5 / next-LTS kernel, >> maybe we should. (or i am wrong, and we totally do it). >> However in practice, people who use/care about HWE kernels upgrade to >> the next HWE stack and/or next LTS release quite rapidly. >> > > For those who opt-in sure, but there are people who buy machines with > a point release installed. I don't think we can make that assumption > for them.
My understanding is that in that specific case the cert team has some sort of flag that enables them to proceed to the next-lts kernel when the new certification completes. But it's still a general issue. Kind regards, Bryan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss