From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brian Kroth Subject: Re: dropping old distros: el6, precise 12.04, debian wheezy? Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 10:58:12 -0500 Message-ID: <20150730155812.GE15736@gmail.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0383945168==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ceph-users-bounces-idqoXFIVOFJgJs9I8MT0rw@public.gmane.org Sender: "ceph-users" To: Sage Weil Cc: ceph-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, ceph-users-Qp0mS5GaXlQ@public.gmane.org List-Id: ceph-devel.vger.kernel.org --===============0383945168== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uCPdOCrL+PnN2Vxy" Content-Disposition: inline --uCPdOCrL+PnN2Vxy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sage Weil 2015-07-30 06:54: >As time marches on it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain proper >builds and packages for older distros. For example, as we make the >systemd transition, maintaining the kludgey sysvinit and udev support for >centos6/rhel6 is a pain in the butt and eats up time and energy to >maintain and test that we could be spending doing more useful work. > >"Dropping" them would mean: > > - Ongoing development on master (and future versions like infernalis and >jewel) would not be tested on these distros. > > - We would stop building upstream release packages on ceph.com for new >releases. > > - We would probably continue building hammer and firefly packages for >future bugfix point releases. > > - The downstream distros would probably continue to package them, but the >burden would be on them. For example, if Ubuntu wanted to ship Jewel on >precise 12.04, they could, but they'd probably need to futz with the >packaging and/or build environment to make it work. > >So... given that, I'd like to gauge user interest in these old distros. >Specifically, > > CentOS6 / RHEL6 > Ubuntu precise 12.04 > Debian wheezy > >Would anyone miss them? > >In particular, dropping these three would mean we could drop sysvinit >entirely and focus on systemd (and continue maintaining the existing >upstart files for just a bit longer). That would be a relief. (The >sysvinit files wouldn't go away in the source tree, but we wouldn't worry >about packaging and testing them properly.) > >Thanks! >sage As I still haven't heard or seen about any upstream distros for Debian=20 Jessie (see also [1]), I am still running Debian Wheezy and as that is=20 supposed to be supported for another ~4 years by Debian, it would be=20 very nice if there were at least stability and security fixes backported=20 for the upstream ceph package repositories for that platform. Additionally, I'll note that I'm personally likely to continue to use=20 sysvinit so long as I still can, even when I am able to make the switch=20 to Jessie. Thanks, Brian [1] --uCPdOCrL+PnN2Vxy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlW6SZEACgkQdtkBin+QuSChrwCgjxjgnUAnZDdnYRP0fnfYEs8q KmYAn3tXn1b9b4V0Lku9Um6mIy5wm8xY =yw4t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --uCPdOCrL+PnN2Vxy-- --===============0383945168== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users-idqoXFIVOFJgJs9I8MT0rw@public.gmane.org http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com --===============0383945168==--