Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> writes: > 26/01/2019 00:37, Ferruh Yigit: >> On 1/25/2019 9:16 PM, Aaron Conole wrote: >> > Jay Rolette <role...@infinite.io> writes: >> > >> >>> * Questions from Intel Test about the use of the Stable Tree. >> >>> Do people use it? Each stable/LTS release requires a lot of >> >>> testing and there are currently 3 releases to be tested. >> >> >> >> We do @ infinite io. >> > >> > +1. Red Hat also uses the LTS releases. >> >> I assume the question is around stable tree, not LTS. >> We have LTS trees: 16.11, 17.11, 18.11 >> And a stable tree valid for one release, latest stable tree will be: 18.08.x >> >> In the existence of the LTS, do we need to keep stable tree?
I misunderstood the question I guess. I saw 'stable/LTS' and assumed it was lumping them together, sorry. Red Hat uses the LTS trees. We don't use the 'stable' tree (ie: Red Hat won't use 19.08.1). Kevin can correct me if i got something wrong here. > Not sure to understand this question. > Yes we need 18.08.1 which is supposed to be more stable than 18.11.0. > >> > I'm curious why there are three? >> > Isn't 16.11 deprecated now that 18.11 is released? Maybe I >> > misunderstand that part. >> >> 16.11 will have latest release and later EOL. For one release there are three >> LTS, other times two. > > 16.11.9 was supposed to be tested and released before 18.11.1. > The plan was to have only 2 LTS at a time. I was under the impression that the instant (X+2).11 releases, X.11 is EOL. I guess that's for someone else to explain (maybe a candidate for something in doc/guides/.../release_cadence.rst to help clarify)?
