[CentOS-devel] What Gluster versions would you like to see in the CentOS Storage SIG?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/11/15 10:18, Niels de Vos wrote:
> Hi Gluster users running on CentOS!
> 
> As you may have heard before, we're planning on providing stable
> Gluster releases and related packages through the CentOS Storage
> SIG [0]. We would like to know what version of Gluster and which
> versions of CentOS are most wanted by our users.
> 
> The current support for Gluster defines 3 stable releases at the
> time. This means that 3.7, 3.6 and 3.5 are supported by the Gluster
> Community. Once 3.8 is released, 3.5 will become unsupported and
> will not receive any updates anymore. 3.8 is planned to be released
> early 2016 [1].
> 
> We can provide all Gluster packages for CentOS-7 and 6, but
> CentOS-5 can only get recent versions of the Gluster client.
> 
> Now, we want to know which combinations our users like to see in
> the CentOS Storage SIG:
> 
> - CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.7: latest and greatest, will be included -
> CentOS-6 + GlusterFS 3.7: very much used release, also included
> 
> - CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.6: some users, you? - CentOS-6 + GlusterFS
> 3.6: some users, you?
> 
> - CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.5: fewer users, you? - CentOS-6 +
> GlusterFS 3.5: fewer users, you?
> 
> - CentOS-5 + GlusterFS 3.7 (client only): nobody? - CentOS-5 +
> GlusterFS 3.6: nobody? - CentOS-5 + GlusterFS 3.5: nobody?
> 
> 
> Please speak up and let us know what versions you depend on for
> next few months. You can reply to this email to the list (note that
> it is x-posted, one mailinglist is sufficient for your reply),
> directly to me or over IRC in #centos-devel or #gluster.
> 
> Many thanks, Niels
> 
> 
> 0. https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage 1.
> https://www.gluster.org/community/roadmap/

Hi Niels,

I guess that's also a decision to take at the Storage SIG level, but
(my opinion) I'd think that targeting CentOS 6 and 7 would make sense,
and Gluster 3.6/3.7 (we still rely on Gluster 3.6 on CentOS 6
ourselves within the CentOS infra)

I don't think that having CentOS 5 would make sense, but can be done
probably if there is "demand" for it. It would be then "interesting"
as our Koji build farm (cbs.centos.org) only covers 6 and 7 (and we
had no plan on building for 5 anymore, at least from SIGs perspective)


- -- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZBxe0ACgkQnVkHo1a+xU5z+wCfZatVXgaJxoN1+sQg/Wphg7i+
qnwAn3631W2TtONT5SXn7qXJ38efD9JR
=iBGY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----