incubator-bigtop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Bayer <andrew.ba...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Official list of supported platforms
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2011 02:59:06 GMT
I'm opposed to mandating support for the commercial distros for now.
Theoretically, if we cover OpenSUSE and CentOS, we more-or-less cover SLES
and RHEL as well.

A.

On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Bruno Mahé <bmahe@apache.org> wrote:

> On 08/28/2011 03:14 PM, Peter Linnell wrote:
> > On 08/28/2011 02:29 PM, Bruno Mahé wrote:
> >> On 08/26/2011 12:35 PM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
> >>> ...we should probably do this. I know James had thoughts on what Ubuntu
> >>> releases we should support, and that Bruno's got thoughts on
> >>> Mageia/OpenSUSE, but we should probably codify the list somewhere.
> Let's
> >>> hear what platforms you all think we should support for 0.2.0, and then
> >>> we'll vote on 'em to build out the list.
> >>>
> >>> A.
> >>>
> >> Top tier (the one we can't break):
> >> * Latest CentOS (6.0)
> >> * Latest Ubuntu LTS (10.04)
> >> * Latest OpenSUSE (11.4)
> >> * Latest Fedora (15)
> >>
> >>
> >> 2nd tier (the ones without enough interest to be in the top tier, but
> >> enough volunteers to maintain it):
> >> * Latest Mageia (I volunteer to maintain it)
> >>
> >>
> >> The top tier means we can't check in any patch that will break any of
> >> these OSes. It also means we can't upgrade a component of BigTop if that
> >> component cannot be built on any of these OSes.
> >> Regarding the 2nd tier, it means not having a build is not a blocker for
> >> a release and it is fine to have a commit breaking Mageia's support.
> >> Although it does not mean we should break it on purpose either. The more
> >> time I spend fixing Mageia, the less time I spend on other things.
> >>
> >> B.
> > Hi,
> >
> > What about SLES 11 ?
> >
> > Peter
>
> That was my thoughts on what we should support, not an authoritative one.
> I didn't put SLES or RHEL because I am not sure of the license
> implications:
> * Should the OSes in the top tier be available to anyone to fix?
> * If only a few people have access to them, wouldn't releases depend on
> these people? (in which case, they could be in the second tier)
> * Is there any Apache restriction on that matter?
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message