Re: [Xen-devel] Which trees are supported (Was: Re: [qemu-upstream-4.2-testing test] 77180: regressions - FAIL)

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 12:44 +0000, Lars Kurth wrote:
> > On 7 Jan 2016, at 11:45, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > > > On 07.01.16 at 12:22, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > So this arose because Stefano was unaware that 4.2 was no longer
> > > supported.
> > > Neither am I ever confident about where the cut-off lie, e.g. I
> > > always have
> > > to ask if I am doing backports for a security issue.
> > > 
> > > We should add rows to http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Release_Features
> > > right
> > > under Initial Release giving first the date until which that tree is
> > > supported with backports and second the date until which security
> > > support
> > > will exist. We might also want to add a third "status" row. e.g.
> > > "Supported", "Security Support only", "EOL" (we'll deal with extended
> > > support by a third party when that next arises).
> > > 
> > > I'm happy to make the edits, however I don't know what dates I would
> > > write 
> > > here. Taking it to be 18 months of Support and a further 18 months of
> > > security support I would get:
> 
> Ian, that would be great. Can you ping me when done?

Done.

I dropped the "EOL - " prefixes, since it seems that if we forget to add
them as new things are EOL'd then there would be ambiguity between things
marked "EOL - Date" and things marked as just "Date" where Date is in the
past -- i.e. folks might think the EOL didn't occur.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel