You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com> on 2018/01/11 17:11:08 UTC
[PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
I've cross-posted this as it ultimately effects users more than developers.
I've created a wiki page with the EOL dates from the respective 'vendors' of our main supported hypervisors and mgmt. server OSes.
I've taken End Of Life to be the end of 'mainstream' support i.e. the point at which updates to packages will no longer be available. And part of the discussion should be whether this EOL date should be moved out to consider end of security patching instead.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/WIP+-+UNOFFICIAL+-+PROPOSAL+-+EOL+Dates
I would like to propose, that as part of the release notes for the forthcoming 4.11 release and as a general announcement, that we declare that:
* For any OSes/Hypervisors that are already EOL - we will no longer test/support them from the first release after June 2018 (6 months from now). And they will be removed from codebase (mainly the database) in the first release after Sept 2018 (9 months from now).
* We set End Of Support dates and Removal from Code dates for the remaining OSes/Hypervisors. I propose that End Of Support should be the first release after EOL from the vendor, with code removal taking place in the first release which occurs after 6 months from 'vendor' EOL date.
Thoughts please........
Kind regards,
Paul Angus
paul.angus@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
They would be locked into ACS version 11 if the team incorporated any
dependency on new features from RHEL/CentOS 7 into an ACS version after 11.
I gather that this would give them full support until the beginning of
2020 depending on when the support clock starts for ACS 11.
Would this allow them enough time to get a migration completed?
I suppose that they could find a vendor that would offer them a plan of
extended ACS 11 support to apply security fixes to ACS 11 after it goes
off official LTS support.
If testing on Centos 6 was dropped in the ACS 12 Release Plan without
inclusion of any CentOS 7 dependencies into the actual code, they would
have to do their own testing of RCs for ACS 12 on CentOS 6 or pay a
support team to do this testing and to modify any installation/upgrade
scripts that will not run on CentOS 6.
So far we are up to 1 possible existing client where this is a problem.
I believe the other client using CentOS 6 did not actually have the
CentOS 6 hosts managed by ACS.
Ron
On 22/01/2018 7:42 AM, Dag Sonstebo wrote:
> Agree with Ron that new CloudStack users are unlikely to want to use RHEL/CentOS v6.x, however as Eric hinted at there will be existing CloudStack users using version 6 for a while still.
>
> I am working with one company with 1000+ RHEL6 KVM hosts and no easy (or particularly clean) RHEL7 upgrade path – for them dropping RHEL6 support in 2018 would be a major issue.
>
> On the management side this should however be a lot less of an issue.
>
> Regards,
> Dag Sonstebo
> Cloud Architect
> ShapeBlue
>
> On 17/01/2018, 14:50, "Ron Wheeler" <rw...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
>
> It might also be helpful to know what version of ACS as well.
> Some indication of your plan/desire to upgrade ACS, hypervisor, or
> management server operating system might be helpful.
> There is a big difference between the situation where someone is running
> ACS 4.9x on CentOS 6 and wants to upgrade to ACS 4.12 while keeping
> CentOS 6 and another environment where the planned upgrade to ACS4.12
> will be done at the same time as an upgrade to CentOS 7.x.
>
> Is it fair to say that any proposed changes in this area will occur in
> 4.12 at the earliest and will not likely occur before summer 2018?
>
>
> Ron
>
>
> On 17/01/2018 4:23 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> > Thanks Eric,
> >
> > As you'll see from the intro email to this thread, the purpose here is to ensure that we don't strand a 'non-trivial' number of users by dropping support for any given hypervisor, or management server operating system.
> >
> > Hence the request to users to let the community know what they are using, so that a fact-based community consensus can be reached.
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Paul Angus
> >
> > paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> > www.shapeblue.com
> > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> > @shapeblue
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eric Lee Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 16 January 2018 23:36
> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
> >
> >> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
> >> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and
> >> q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission
> >> critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to
> >> utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
> > But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It is, for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been obsolete for years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
> >
> > The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs to be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of Centos 6 in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not supported by Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the LIO storage stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last Cloudstack version that supports Centos 6.x as its server host should continue to receive bug fixes until Centos 6.x is EOL.
> >
> > Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
> > Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their IT investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your technology.
> >
> > This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
> > 7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state of ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in real life environments. Don't be those people.
> >
> >
> > On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> >> Hi Eric,
> >>
> >> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
> >> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
> >>
> >> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
> >>
> >>
> >> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Paul Angus
> >>
> >> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> >> www.shapeblue.com
> >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
> >> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
> >>
> >> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
> >>
> >> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
> >>
> >>
> Dag.Sonstebo@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> a. Hypervisor:
> >>>
> >>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
> >>>
> >>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
> >>> packages don't work I think?)
> >>>
> >>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts, comments?
> >>>
>
> --
> Ron Wheeler
> President
> Artifact Software Inc
> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
> skype: ronaldmwheeler
> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>
>
>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
They would be locked into ACS version 11 if the team incorporated any
dependency on new features from RHEL/CentOS 7 into an ACS version after 11.
I gather that this would give them full support until the beginning of
2020 depending on when the support clock starts for ACS 11.
Would this allow them enough time to get a migration completed?
I suppose that they could find a vendor that would offer them a plan of
extended ACS 11 support to apply security fixes to ACS 11 after it goes
off official LTS support.
If testing on Centos 6 was dropped in the ACS 12 Release Plan without
inclusion of any CentOS 7 dependencies into the actual code, they would
have to do their own testing of RCs for ACS 12 on CentOS 6 or pay a
support team to do this testing and to modify any installation/upgrade
scripts that will not run on CentOS 6.
So far we are up to 1 possible existing client where this is a problem.
I believe the other client using CentOS 6 did not actually have the
CentOS 6 hosts managed by ACS.
Ron
On 22/01/2018 7:42 AM, Dag Sonstebo wrote:
> Agree with Ron that new CloudStack users are unlikely to want to use RHEL/CentOS v6.x, however as Eric hinted at there will be existing CloudStack users using version 6 for a while still.
>
> I am working with one company with 1000+ RHEL6 KVM hosts and no easy (or particularly clean) RHEL7 upgrade path – for them dropping RHEL6 support in 2018 would be a major issue.
>
> On the management side this should however be a lot less of an issue.
>
> Regards,
> Dag Sonstebo
> Cloud Architect
> ShapeBlue
>
> On 17/01/2018, 14:50, "Ron Wheeler" <rw...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
>
> It might also be helpful to know what version of ACS as well.
> Some indication of your plan/desire to upgrade ACS, hypervisor, or
> management server operating system might be helpful.
> There is a big difference between the situation where someone is running
> ACS 4.9x on CentOS 6 and wants to upgrade to ACS 4.12 while keeping
> CentOS 6 and another environment where the planned upgrade to ACS4.12
> will be done at the same time as an upgrade to CentOS 7.x.
>
> Is it fair to say that any proposed changes in this area will occur in
> 4.12 at the earliest and will not likely occur before summer 2018?
>
>
> Ron
>
>
> On 17/01/2018 4:23 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> > Thanks Eric,
> >
> > As you'll see from the intro email to this thread, the purpose here is to ensure that we don't strand a 'non-trivial' number of users by dropping support for any given hypervisor, or management server operating system.
> >
> > Hence the request to users to let the community know what they are using, so that a fact-based community consensus can be reached.
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Paul Angus
> >
> > paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> > www.shapeblue.com
> > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> > @shapeblue
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eric Lee Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 16 January 2018 23:36
> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
> >
> >> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
> >> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and
> >> q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission
> >> critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to
> >> utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
> > But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It is, for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been obsolete for years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
> >
> > The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs to be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of Centos 6 in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not supported by Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the LIO storage stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last Cloudstack version that supports Centos 6.x as its server host should continue to receive bug fixes until Centos 6.x is EOL.
> >
> > Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
> > Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their IT investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your technology.
> >
> > This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
> > 7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state of ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in real life environments. Don't be those people.
> >
> >
> > On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> >> Hi Eric,
> >>
> >> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
> >> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
> >>
> >> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
> >>
> >>
> >> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Paul Angus
> >>
> >> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> >> www.shapeblue.com
> >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
> >> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
> >>
> >> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
> >>
> >> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
> >>
> >>
> Dag.Sonstebo@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> a. Hypervisor:
> >>>
> >>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
> >>>
> >>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
> >>> packages don't work I think?)
> >>>
> >>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts, comments?
> >>>
>
> --
> Ron Wheeler
> President
> Artifact Software Inc
> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
> skype: ronaldmwheeler
> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>
>
>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Dag Sonstebo <Da...@shapeblue.com>.
Agree with Ron that new CloudStack users are unlikely to want to use RHEL/CentOS v6.x, however as Eric hinted at there will be existing CloudStack users using version 6 for a while still.
I am working with one company with 1000+ RHEL6 KVM hosts and no easy (or particularly clean) RHEL7 upgrade path – for them dropping RHEL6 support in 2018 would be a major issue.
On the management side this should however be a lot less of an issue.
Regards,
Dag Sonstebo
Cloud Architect
ShapeBlue
On 17/01/2018, 14:50, "Ron Wheeler" <rw...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
It might also be helpful to know what version of ACS as well.
Some indication of your plan/desire to upgrade ACS, hypervisor, or
management server operating system might be helpful.
There is a big difference between the situation where someone is running
ACS 4.9x on CentOS 6 and wants to upgrade to ACS 4.12 while keeping
CentOS 6 and another environment where the planned upgrade to ACS4.12
will be done at the same time as an upgrade to CentOS 7.x.
Is it fair to say that any proposed changes in this area will occur in
4.12 at the earliest and will not likely occur before summer 2018?
Ron
On 17/01/2018 4:23 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> Thanks Eric,
>
> As you'll see from the intro email to this thread, the purpose here is to ensure that we don't strand a 'non-trivial' number of users by dropping support for any given hypervisor, or management server operating system.
>
> Hence the request to users to let the community know what they are using, so that a fact-based community consensus can be reached.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Lee Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> Sent: 16 January 2018 23:36
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and
>> q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission
>> critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to
>> utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
> But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It is, for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been obsolete for years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
>
> The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs to be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of Centos 6 in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not supported by Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the LIO storage stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last Cloudstack version that supports Centos 6.x as its server host should continue to receive bug fixes until Centos 6.x is EOL.
>
> Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
> Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their IT investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your technology.
>
> This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
> 7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state of ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in real life environments. Don't be those people.
>
>
> On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
>>
>> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
>>
>>
>> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Paul Angus
>>
>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>> www.shapeblue.com
>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>>
>> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>>
>> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>>
>>
Dag.Sonstebo@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>>
>>>
>>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>>
>>>
>>> a. Hypervisor:
>>>
>>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>>
>>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
>>> packages don't work I think?)
>>>
>>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>>
>>>
>>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts, comments?
>>>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Dag Sonstebo <Da...@shapeblue.com>.
Agree with Ron that new CloudStack users are unlikely to want to use RHEL/CentOS v6.x, however as Eric hinted at there will be existing CloudStack users using version 6 for a while still.
I am working with one company with 1000+ RHEL6 KVM hosts and no easy (or particularly clean) RHEL7 upgrade path – for them dropping RHEL6 support in 2018 would be a major issue.
On the management side this should however be a lot less of an issue.
Regards,
Dag Sonstebo
Cloud Architect
ShapeBlue
On 17/01/2018, 14:50, "Ron Wheeler" <rw...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
It might also be helpful to know what version of ACS as well.
Some indication of your plan/desire to upgrade ACS, hypervisor, or
management server operating system might be helpful.
There is a big difference between the situation where someone is running
ACS 4.9x on CentOS 6 and wants to upgrade to ACS 4.12 while keeping
CentOS 6 and another environment where the planned upgrade to ACS4.12
will be done at the same time as an upgrade to CentOS 7.x.
Is it fair to say that any proposed changes in this area will occur in
4.12 at the earliest and will not likely occur before summer 2018?
Ron
On 17/01/2018 4:23 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> Thanks Eric,
>
> As you'll see from the intro email to this thread, the purpose here is to ensure that we don't strand a 'non-trivial' number of users by dropping support for any given hypervisor, or management server operating system.
>
> Hence the request to users to let the community know what they are using, so that a fact-based community consensus can be reached.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Lee Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> Sent: 16 January 2018 23:36
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and
>> q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission
>> critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to
>> utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
> But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It is, for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been obsolete for years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
>
> The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs to be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of Centos 6 in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not supported by Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the LIO storage stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last Cloudstack version that supports Centos 6.x as its server host should continue to receive bug fixes until Centos 6.x is EOL.
>
> Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
> Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their IT investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your technology.
>
> This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
> 7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state of ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in real life environments. Don't be those people.
>
>
> On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
>>
>> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
>>
>>
>> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Paul Angus
>>
>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>> www.shapeblue.com
>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>>
>> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>>
>> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>>
>>
Dag.Sonstebo@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>>
>>>
>>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>>
>>>
>>> a. Hypervisor:
>>>
>>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>>
>>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
>>> packages don't work I think?)
>>>
>>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>>
>>>
>>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts, comments?
>>>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Jean-Francois Nadeau <th...@gmail.com>.
+1 On the versions of ACS in the matrix. I.e. it sounds like today most
production setup runs 4.9 or before and until 4.11 is GA and stabilizes it
sounds like 4.9 is the only good option for a go live today. Knowing how
long 4.9 would be supported is key.
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Ron Wheeler <rwheeler@artifact-software.com
> wrote:
> It might also be helpful to know what version of ACS as well.
> Some indication of your plan/desire to upgrade ACS, hypervisor, or
> management server operating system might be helpful.
> There is a big difference between the situation where someone is running
> ACS 4.9x on CentOS 6 and wants to upgrade to ACS 4.12 while keeping CentOS
> 6 and another environment where the planned upgrade to ACS4.12 will be done
> at the same time as an upgrade to CentOS 7.x.
>
> Is it fair to say that any proposed changes in this area will occur in
> 4.12 at the earliest and will not likely occur before summer 2018?
>
>
> Ron
>
>
>
> On 17/01/2018 4:23 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
>
>> Thanks Eric,
>>
>> As you'll see from the intro email to this thread, the purpose here is to
>> ensure that we don't strand a 'non-trivial' number of users by dropping
>> support for any given hypervisor, or management server operating system.
>>
>> Hence the request to users to let the community know what they are using,
>> so that a fact-based community consensus can be reached.
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Paul Angus
>>
>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>> www.shapeblue.com
>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
>> @shapeblue
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eric Lee Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 16 January 2018 23:36
>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and
>>> q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission
>>> critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to
>>> utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
>>>
>> But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique
>> versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It is,
>> for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been obsolete for
>> years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
>>
>> The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs to
>> be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of Centos 6
>> in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not supported by
>> Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the LIO storage
>> stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last Cloudstack version that
>> supports Centos 6.x as its server host should continue to receive bug fixes
>> until Centos 6.x is EOL.
>>
>> Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
>> Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making
>> someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their IT
>> investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your technology.
>>
>> This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization
>> hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
>> 7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT
>> environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish
>> existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state of
>> ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being
>> designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any
>> understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in real
>> life environments. Don't be those people.
>>
>>
>> On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Eric,
>>>
>>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2
>>> 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical
>>> updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in
>>> the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x Also the testing
>>> and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to
>>> maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
>>>
>>> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and
>>> something that we need to address regardless.
>>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range
>>> of people.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Paul Angus
>>>
>>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>>> www.shapeblue.com
>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
>>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>>>
>>> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is
>>> 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>>>
>>> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy
>>> right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install
>>> documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That
>>> needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>>>
>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should
>>>> remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by
>>>> project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> a. Hypervisor:
>>>>
>>>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>>>
>>>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
>>>> packages don't work I think?)
>>>>
>>>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and
>>>> Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts, comments?
>>>>
>>>>
> --
> Ron Wheeler
> President
> Artifact Software Inc
> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
> skype: ronaldmwheeler
> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>
>
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
It might also be helpful to know what version of ACS as well.
Some indication of your plan/desire to upgrade ACS, hypervisor, or
management server operating system might be helpful.
There is a big difference between the situation where someone is running
ACS 4.9x on CentOS 6 and wants to upgrade to ACS 4.12 while keeping
CentOS 6 and another environment where the planned upgrade to ACS4.12
will be done at the same time as an upgrade to CentOS 7.x.
Is it fair to say that any proposed changes in this area will occur in
4.12 at the earliest and will not likely occur before summer 2018?
Ron
On 17/01/2018 4:23 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> Thanks Eric,
>
> As you'll see from the intro email to this thread, the purpose here is to ensure that we don't strand a 'non-trivial' number of users by dropping support for any given hypervisor, or management server operating system.
>
> Hence the request to users to let the community know what they are using, so that a fact-based community consensus can be reached.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Lee Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> Sent: 16 January 2018 23:36
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and
>> q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission
>> critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to
>> utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
> But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It is, for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been obsolete for years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
>
> The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs to be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of Centos 6 in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not supported by Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the LIO storage stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last Cloudstack version that supports Centos 6.x as its server host should continue to receive bug fixes until Centos 6.x is EOL.
>
> Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
> Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their IT investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your technology.
>
> This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
> 7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state of ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in real life environments. Don't be those people.
>
>
> On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
>>
>> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
>>
>>
>> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Paul Angus
>>
>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>> www.shapeblue.com
>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>>
>> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>>
>> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>>
>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>>
>>>
>>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>>
>>>
>>> a. Hypervisor:
>>>
>>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>>
>>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
>>> packages don't work I think?)
>>>
>>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>>
>>>
>>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts, comments?
>>>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
It might also be helpful to know what version of ACS as well.
Some indication of your plan/desire to upgrade ACS, hypervisor, or
management server operating system might be helpful.
There is a big difference between the situation where someone is running
ACS 4.9x on CentOS 6 and wants to upgrade to ACS 4.12 while keeping
CentOS 6 and another environment where the planned upgrade to ACS4.12
will be done at the same time as an upgrade to CentOS 7.x.
Is it fair to say that any proposed changes in this area will occur in
4.12 at the earliest and will not likely occur before summer 2018?
Ron
On 17/01/2018 4:23 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> Thanks Eric,
>
> As you'll see from the intro email to this thread, the purpose here is to ensure that we don't strand a 'non-trivial' number of users by dropping support for any given hypervisor, or management server operating system.
>
> Hence the request to users to let the community know what they are using, so that a fact-based community consensus can be reached.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Lee Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> Sent: 16 January 2018 23:36
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and
>> q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission
>> critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to
>> utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
> But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It is, for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been obsolete for years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
>
> The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs to be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of Centos 6 in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not supported by Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the LIO storage stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last Cloudstack version that supports Centos 6.x as its server host should continue to receive bug fixes until Centos 6.x is EOL.
>
> Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
> Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their IT investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your technology.
>
> This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
> 7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state of ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in real life environments. Don't be those people.
>
>
> On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
>> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
>>
>> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
>>
>>
>> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Paul Angus
>>
>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>> www.shapeblue.com
>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>>
>> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>>
>> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>>
>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>>
>>>
>>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>>
>>>
>>> a. Hypervisor:
>>>
>>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>>
>>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
>>> packages don't work I think?)
>>>
>>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>>
>>>
>>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts, comments?
>>>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
RE: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>.
Thanks Eric,
As you'll see from the intro email to this thread, the purpose here is to ensure that we don't strand a 'non-trivial' number of users by dropping support for any given hypervisor, or management server operating system.
Hence the request to users to let the community know what they are using, so that a fact-based community consensus can be reached.
Kind regards,
Paul Angus
paul.angus@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Lee Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 January 2018 23:36
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and
> q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission
> critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to
> utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It is, for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been obsolete for years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs to be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of Centos 6 in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not supported by Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the LIO storage stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last Cloudstack version that supports Centos 6.x as its server host should continue to receive bug fixes until Centos 6.x is EOL.
Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their IT investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your technology.
This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state of ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in real life environments. Don't be those people.
On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument
> that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
>
> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
>
>
> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>
> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>
> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>
>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>
>>
>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>
>>
>> a. Hypervisor:
>>
>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>
>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
>> packages don't work I think?)
>>
>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>
>>
>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>
>>
>> Thoughts, comments?
>>
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Eric Lee Green <er...@gmail.com>.
> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
But this has always been the case for Centos 6.x. It is running antique
versions of everything, and has been doing so for quite some time. It
is, for example, running versions of Gnome and init that have been
obsolete for years. Same deal with the version of MySQL that it comes with.
The reality is that Centos 6.x guest support, at the very least, needs
to be tested with each new version of Cloudstack until final EOL of
Centos 6 in Q2 2020. New versions of Cloudstack with new features not
supported by Centos 6 (such as LVM support for KVM, which requires the
LIO storage stack) can require Centos 7 or later, but the last
Cloudstack version that supports Centos 6.x as its server host should
continue to receive bug fixes until Centos 6.x is EOL.
Making someone's IT investment obsolete is a way to irrelevancy.
Cloudstack is already an also-ran in the cloud marketplace. Making
someone's IT investment obsolete before the official EOL time for their
IT investment is a good way to have a mass migration away from your
technology.
This doesn't particularly affect me since my Centos 6 virtualization
hosts are not running Cloudstack and are going to be re-imaged to Centos
7 before being added to the Cloudstack cluster, but ignoring the IT
environment that people actually live in, as versus the one we wish
existed, is annoying regardless. A friend of mine once said of the state
of ERP software, "enterprise software is dog food if dog food was being
designed by cats." I.e., the people writing the software rarely have any
understanding of how it is actually used by real life enterprises in
real life environments. Don't be those people.
On 01/16/2018 09:58 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
> Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
>
> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
>
>
> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>
> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>
> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>
>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>
>>
>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>
>>
>> a. Hypervisor:
>>
>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>
>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed, packages don't work I think?)
>>
>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>
>>
>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>
>>
>> Thoughts, comments?
>>
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Tim Mackey <tm...@gmail.com>.
I think there are three pieces in play. First there are guest OSes, second
the management server and third the hypervisors themselves. For the
hypervisors and management server I can see a more stringent set of
requirements. Going by the XenServer experience, legacy guests should
continue to work, but removing any "unsupported" guest OS versions from
template definition should be done.
When communicating end of support status, I've always been a fan of
something which can be quickly understood. e.g. "XenServer support ends six
months after Citrix drops primary support for the version". Then follow
that in a table with a date, but I feel tying it to the "upstream" support
statement more clearly communicates the real dependency.
From a release notes perspective, I'd recommend communicating any impending
support statement change early and often. e.g. For any "upstream" EOL/EOS
statement occurring in the next 12 months we add a notice to the release
notes reminding people of the impending change.
For new versions of things, maybe adopting a statement that within X months
after launch of the dependency we'd have support for it?
-tim
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Ron Wheeler <rwheeler@artifact-software.com
> wrote:
> I am having a hard time imagining why a new Cloudstack user would want to
> use CentOS 6.
> I have not heard complaints from any forum about applications running on
> CentOS 6 that could not run on CentOS 7.
>
> It does have an impact of DevOps but even there it is pretty minor and
> well documented and once one gets one's head around systemctl, journalctl
> and firewalld, it really is a lot better
>
> As you pointed out, support for CentOS 7 is mandatory regardless of the
> decision on CentOS 6.
> It will be a big black mark against CloudStack if the current
> RedHat/CentOS release is not supported 2.5 years after its release.
>
> For existing Cloudstack users, is there a large risk that dropping
> official support for CentOS6 as a VM would result in a CentOS 6 VM not
> running after an upgrade to the latest Cloudstack?
> Is there anyone in the community that absolutely can not upgrade? Would
> they take over the testing of CentOS 6 if official support was dropped?
>
> Anyone using CentOS6 as a hypervisor will have to upgrade soon in any
> event and as you point out Cloudstack will soon be forced to move from
> CentOS 6 by dependencies dropping support for CentOS 6.
>
> It would seem to make sense to declare an EOL date for support for CentOS
> 6 as a hypervisor as soon as possible so that system administrators are put
> on notice.
>
> Ron
>
>
>
>
> On 16/01/2018 12:58 PM, Paul Angus wrote:
>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument that
>> I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020
>> RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates,
>> meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future
>> are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
>> Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community
>> increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new
>> versions.
>>
>> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and
>> something that we need to address regardless.
>>
>>
>> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range
>> of people.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Paul Angus
>>
>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>> www.shapeblue.com
>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
>> @shapeblue
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>>
>> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is
>> 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>>
>> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy
>> right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install
>> documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That
>> needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>>
>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>>
>>>
>>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should
>>> remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by
>>> project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>>
>>>
>>> a. Hypervisor:
>>>
>>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>>
>>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed,
>>> packages don't work I think?)
>>>
>>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>>
>>>
>>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and
>>> Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts, comments?
>>>
>>>
> --
> Ron Wheeler
> President
> Artifact Software Inc
> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
> skype: ronaldmwheeler
> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>
>
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
I am having a hard time imagining why a new Cloudstack user would want
to use CentOS 6.
I have not heard complaints from any forum about applications running on
CentOS 6 that could not run on CentOS 7.
It does have an impact of DevOps but even there it is pretty minor and
well documented and once one gets one's head around systemctl,
journalctl and firewalld, it really is a lot better
As you pointed out, support for CentOS 7 is mandatory regardless of the
decision on CentOS 6.
It will be a big black mark against CloudStack if the current
RedHat/CentOS release is not supported 2.5 years after its release.
For existing Cloudstack users, is there a large risk that dropping
official support for CentOS6 as a VM would result in a CentOS 6 VM not
running after an upgrade to the latest Cloudstack?
Is there anyone in the community that absolutely can not upgrade? Would
they take over the testing of CentOS 6 if official support was dropped?
Anyone using CentOS6 as a hypervisor will have to upgrade soon in any
event and as you point out Cloudstack will soon be forced to move from
CentOS 6 by dependencies dropping support for CentOS 6.
It would seem to make sense to declare an EOL date for support for
CentOS 6 as a hypervisor as soon as possible so that system
administrators are put on notice.
Ron
On 16/01/2018 12:58 PM, Paul Angus wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
> Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
>
> Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
>
>
> Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
> Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
>
> Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
>
> People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
>
>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>>
>>
>> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>>
>>
>> a. Hypervisor:
>>
>> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>>
>> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed, packages don't work I think?)
>>
>> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>>
>>
>> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>>
>>
>> Thoughts, comments?
>>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
RE: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>.
Hi Eric,
This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
Kind regards,
Paul Angus
paul.angus@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>
>
> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>
>
> a. Hypervisor:
>
> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>
> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed, packages don't work I think?)
>
> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>
>
> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>
>
> Thoughts, comments?
>
RE: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>.
Hi Eric,
This is the type of discussion that I wanted to open - the argument that I see for earlier dropping of v6 is that - Between May 2018 and q2 2020 RHEL/CentOS 6.x will only receive security and mission critical updates, meanwhile packages on which we depend or may want to utilise in the future are been deprecated or not developed for v6.x
Also the testing and development burden on the CloudStack community increases as we try to maintain backward compatibility while including new versions.
Needing installation documentation for centos 7 is a great point, and something that we need to address regardless.
Does anyone else have a view, I'd really like to here from a wide range of people.
Kind regards,
Paul Angus
paul.angus@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Green [mailto:eric.lee.green@gmail.com]
Sent: 12 January 2018 17:24
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>
>
> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>
>
> a. Hypervisor:
>
> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>
> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed, packages don't work I think?)
>
> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>
>
> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>
>
> Thoughts, comments?
>
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Eric Green <er...@gmail.com>.
Official EOL for Centos 6 / RHEL 6 as declared by Red Hat Software is 11/30/2020. Jumping the gun a bit there, padme.
People on Centos 6 should certainly be working on a migration strategy right now, but the end is not here *yet*. Furthermore, the install documentation is still written for Centos 6 rather than Centos 7. That needs to be fixed before discontinuing support for Centos 6, eh?
> On Jan 12, 2018, at 04:35, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> +1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
>
>
> After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
>
>
> a. Hypervisor:
>
> XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
>
> KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed, packages don't work I think?)
>
> vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
>
>
> b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
>
>
> Thoughts, comments?
>
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>.
+1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
a. Hypervisor:
XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed, packages don't work I think?)
vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
Thoughts, comments?
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
________________________________
From: Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:41:08 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; users@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
I've cross-posted this as it ultimately effects users more than developers.
I've created a wiki page with the EOL dates from the respective 'vendors' of our main supported hypervisors and mgmt. server OSes.
I've taken End Of Life to be the end of 'mainstream' support i.e. the point at which updates to packages will no longer be available. And part of the discussion should be whether this EOL date should be moved out to consider end of security patching instead.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/WIP+-+UNOFFICIAL+-+PROPOSAL+-+EOL+Dates
I would like to propose, that as part of the release notes for the forthcoming 4.11 release and as a general announcement, that we declare that:
* For any OSes/Hypervisors that are already EOL - we will no longer test/support them from the first release after June 2018 (6 months from now). And they will be removed from codebase (mainly the database) in the first release after Sept 2018 (9 months from now).
* We set End Of Support dates and Removal from Code dates for the remaining OSes/Hypervisors. I propose that End Of Support should be the first release after EOL from the vendor, with code removal taking place in the first release which occurs after 6 months from 'vendor' EOL date.
Thoughts please........
Kind regards,
Paul Angus
paul.angus@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Pierre-Luc Dion <pd...@cloudops.com>.
+1!
Do you think it would be the right page to also have debian version used by
the ssvm?
For the management-server section the cloudstack column would list the last
acs version tested on that OS?
Le 11 janv. 2018 12 h 53, "Will Stevens" <ws...@cloudops.com> a écrit :
> I like this initiative. I think this would be valuable to set an
> expectation around supportability.
>
> Cheers,
>
> *Will Stevens*
> CTO
>
> <https://goo.gl/NYZ8KK>
>
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I've cross-posted this as it ultimately effects users more than
> developers.
> >
> > I've created a wiki page with the EOL dates from the respective 'vendors'
> > of our main supported hypervisors and mgmt. server OSes.
> > I've taken End Of Life to be the end of 'mainstream' support i.e. the
> > point at which updates to packages will no longer be available. And part
> > of the discussion should be whether this EOL date should be moved out to
> > consider end of security patching instead.
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/
> > WIP+-+UNOFFICIAL+-+PROPOSAL+-+EOL+Dates
> >
> > I would like to propose, that as part of the release notes for the
> > forthcoming 4.11 release and as a general announcement, that we declare
> > that:
> >
> >
> > * For any OSes/Hypervisors that are already EOL - we will no longer
> > test/support them from the first release after June 2018 (6 months from
> > now). And they will be removed from codebase (mainly the database) in the
> > first release after Sept 2018 (9 months from now).
> > * We set End Of Support dates and Removal from Code dates for the
> > remaining OSes/Hypervisors. I propose that End Of Support should be the
> > first release after EOL from the vendor, with code removal taking place
> in
> > the first release which occurs after 6 months from 'vendor' EOL date.
> >
> > Thoughts please........
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Paul Angus
> >
> >
> > paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> > www.shapeblue.com
> > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> > @shapeblue
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.
I like this initiative. I think this would be valuable to set an
expectation around supportability.
Cheers,
*Will Stevens*
CTO
<https://goo.gl/NYZ8KK>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
> I've cross-posted this as it ultimately effects users more than developers.
>
> I've created a wiki page with the EOL dates from the respective 'vendors'
> of our main supported hypervisors and mgmt. server OSes.
> I've taken End Of Life to be the end of 'mainstream' support i.e. the
> point at which updates to packages will no longer be available. And part
> of the discussion should be whether this EOL date should be moved out to
> consider end of security patching instead.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/
> WIP+-+UNOFFICIAL+-+PROPOSAL+-+EOL+Dates
>
> I would like to propose, that as part of the release notes for the
> forthcoming 4.11 release and as a general announcement, that we declare
> that:
>
>
> * For any OSes/Hypervisors that are already EOL - we will no longer
> test/support them from the first release after June 2018 (6 months from
> now). And they will be removed from codebase (mainly the database) in the
> first release after Sept 2018 (9 months from now).
> * We set End Of Support dates and Removal from Code dates for the
> remaining OSes/Hypervisors. I propose that End Of Support should be the
> first release after EOL from the vendor, with code removal taking place in
> the first release which occurs after 6 months from 'vendor' EOL date.
>
> Thoughts please........
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>.
+1 I've updated the page with upcoming Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
After 4.11, I think 4.12 (assuming releases by mid of 2018) should remove "declared" (they might still work with 4.12+ but in docs and by project we should officially support them) support for following:
a. Hypervisor:
XenServer - 6.2, 6.5,
KVM - CentOS6, RHEL6, Ubuntu12.04 (I think this is already removed, packages don't work I think?)
vSphere/Vmware - 4.x, 5.0, 5.1, 5.5
b. Remove packaging for CentOS6.x, RHEL 6.x (the el6 packages), and Ubuntu 12.04 (any non-systemd debian distro).
Thoughts, comments?
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
________________________________
From: Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:41:08 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; users@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
I've cross-posted this as it ultimately effects users more than developers.
I've created a wiki page with the EOL dates from the respective 'vendors' of our main supported hypervisors and mgmt. server OSes.
I've taken End Of Life to be the end of 'mainstream' support i.e. the point at which updates to packages will no longer be available. And part of the discussion should be whether this EOL date should be moved out to consider end of security patching instead.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/WIP+-+UNOFFICIAL+-+PROPOSAL+-+EOL+Dates
I would like to propose, that as part of the release notes for the forthcoming 4.11 release and as a general announcement, that we declare that:
* For any OSes/Hypervisors that are already EOL - we will no longer test/support them from the first release after June 2018 (6 months from now). And they will be removed from codebase (mainly the database) in the first release after Sept 2018 (9 months from now).
* We set End Of Support dates and Removal from Code dates for the remaining OSes/Hypervisors. I propose that End Of Support should be the first release after EOL from the vendor, with code removal taking place in the first release which occurs after 6 months from 'vendor' EOL date.
Thoughts please........
Kind regards,
Paul Angus
paul.angus@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
Re: [PROPOSE] EOL for supported OSes & Hypervisors
Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.
I like this initiative. I think this would be valuable to set an
expectation around supportability.
Cheers,
*Will Stevens*
CTO
<https://goo.gl/NYZ8KK>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
> I've cross-posted this as it ultimately effects users more than developers.
>
> I've created a wiki page with the EOL dates from the respective 'vendors'
> of our main supported hypervisors and mgmt. server OSes.
> I've taken End Of Life to be the end of 'mainstream' support i.e. the
> point at which updates to packages will no longer be available. And part
> of the discussion should be whether this EOL date should be moved out to
> consider end of security patching instead.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/
> WIP+-+UNOFFICIAL+-+PROPOSAL+-+EOL+Dates
>
> I would like to propose, that as part of the release notes for the
> forthcoming 4.11 release and as a general announcement, that we declare
> that:
>
>
> * For any OSes/Hypervisors that are already EOL - we will no longer
> test/support them from the first release after June 2018 (6 months from
> now). And they will be removed from codebase (mainly the database) in the
> first release after Sept 2018 (9 months from now).
> * We set End Of Support dates and Removal from Code dates for the
> remaining OSes/Hypervisors. I propose that End Of Support should be the
> first release after EOL from the vendor, with code removal taking place in
> the first release which occurs after 6 months from 'vendor' EOL date.
>
> Thoughts please........
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
>
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>