Daan Have not yet decided which version, but fixes will be backported into LTS not the other way around.
But I see what you mean. The code base may have much diverted before 4.7 right? It is not really a problem. It only means more work (argh...). Sooner or later this will happen for every release we choose. I would like to use 4.5 for several reasons, one obvious is, that we know that it is in production on several clouds, including us. On 01/10/2016 12:40 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > Rene, I would advice to support 4.7 as LTS. It adheres to the new > development/release process unlike 4.5 and any bugfixes there can > automatically be merged forward to newer releases to reduce the chance of > regression. > > I am in favour of the general concept. > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Rubens Malheiro <rubens.malhe...@gmail.com >> wrote: > >> +1 >> Em 9 de jan de 2016 8:55 PM, "Rene Moser" <m...@renemoser.net> escreveu: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> I recently started a discussion about the current release process. You >>> may have noticed that CloudStack had a few releases in the last 2 months. >>> >>> My concerns were that many CloudStack users will be confused about these >>> many releases (which one to take? Are fixes backported? How long will it >>> receive fixes? Do I have to upgrade?). >>> >>> We leads me to the question: Does CloudStack need an LTS version? To me >>> it would make sense in many ways: >>> >>> * Users in restrictive cloud environments can choose LTS for getting >>> backwards compatible bug fixes only. >>> >>> * Users in agile cloud environments can choose latest stable and getting >>> new features fast. >>> >>> * CloudStack developers must only maintain the latest stable (mainline) >>> and the LTS version. >>> >>> * CloudStack developers and mainline users can accept, that mainline may >>> break environments but will receive fast forward fixes. >>> >>> To me this would make a lot of sense. I am actually thinking about >>> maintaining 4.5 as a LTS by myself. >>> >>> Any thoughts? +1/-1? >>> >>> Regards >>> René >>> >> > > >
